FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

Sanford Block and Citizens Commission on Human Rights,

Complainants,

against Docket #FIC 90-78

State of Connecticut, Whiting Forensic Institute,

Respondent September 12, 1990

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on June 12, 1990, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.

After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

2. The complainants appealed to the Commission by letter dated February 27, 1990, alleging the respondent denied them access to public records.

3. It is found that by letter dated January 22, 1990, the complainants requested that the respondent's director of forensic services provide them with copies of all the medical records of patient David Peterson for research purposes.

4. It is found that by letter dated January 23, 1990, the respondent's director of forensic services denied the complainants' request.

5. At the hearing the complainants clarified that the records they seek include documentation of what medications were prescribed to the patient, the medical staff's notes on the effects these medications had on him, other staff notes on his treatment and its results, and any complaints he made about the medications.

6. It is found that all these records are public records as defined by 1-18a(d), G.S.

7. It is further found, however, that these records are "communications and records" as defined by 52-146d, G.S.

Docket #FIC 90-78 Page Two

8. It is concluded, therefore, that 52-146e, G.S., prohibits the disclosure of these records without the consent of the patient or his representative.

9. It is found that neither Mr. Peterson nor his attorney have consented to the disclosure of these records.

The following order of the Commission is hereby recommended based on the complete record in the above-captioned complaint:

1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.

2. The Commission notes that 52-146g, G.S., details a procedure through which the complainants may be able to gain access to the records for their research purposes.

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 12, 1990.

Tina C. Frappier

Acting Clerk of the Commission

Docket #FIC 90-78 Page Three

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

SANFORD BLOCK AND CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

5265 Fountain Avenue, Suite 2

Los Angeles, CA 90029

and

Mr. Kevin Hall

Citizens Commission of Human Rights

89 Massachusetts Avenue

Suite 213

Boston, MA 02115

STATE OF CONNECTICUT, WHITING FORENSIC INSTITUTE

c/o Patricia A. Gerner, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General

P.O. Box 120

Hartford, CT 06101

Tina C. Frappier

Acting Clerk of the Commission