The Tennessee Coalition for Open Government turns it's attention to an absurd argument advanced by the City of Memphis as the basis for its refusal to release city-owned animal shelter medical records.

What is that basis?

The animal's right to medical records confidentiality.

Deborah Fisher, executive director of Tennessee Coalition of Open Government, writes:

"As Tennessee "sees it, no differentiation exists in the law between human and non-human patients when it comes to a patient's privilege of confidentiality. If you didn't catch that: Dogs and cats possess a right equal to humans to keep their medical records private.

"Are animals receiving proper medical care? Are they getting pain medication? Or are they being left to suffer without it in cages until their euthanasia date or until someone adopts them? Is the medical diagnosis of some animals such that it would be more humane to euthanize rather than wait several days for a possible adoption?

"And, perhaps most importantly, why does Memphis Animal Services want to hide this information now, after all these years?

"Memphis Animal Services has a $4.45 million expenditure budget. In addition to city funding, it gets donations.

"Government officials often like to control the message about their programs, so they release information when they want and in the context they desire.

"The public records law operates differently. Citizens have the right to access information in public records, unfiltered. In this way, the public records law provides a check on what government officials say.

"A record that documents how a city-owned agency treats a dog or cat in its custody is the type of public record that promotes accountability of government activities.

"Exploiting an imagined right of privacy of a dog is a twisted way to shield the government's treatment of that dog.

"Whose privacy are we protecting? Whose secrets are we keeping? The dog's or the government's?"