There are at least two issues to this - the legality and the
ethics. The two are in my view separate.
There remains a question regarding the legality, as to which
legislation trumps which, and the BMA advice is essentially that the
HSCA is the legislation that should be followed.
Regardless of the law there are ethical issues. Without suggesting
that the view is universal, some feel that even in a democracy the
law can end up requesting doctors to behave unethically.
I do not think there is ANY ethical justification for making my
previous information available without my explicit consent and I do
not believe that there is any overwhelming obligation for me to give
such consent.
If the government, for the future, wishes to make access to the NHS
dependent on eg. agreeing to the use of personal data to defray the
cost, or eg. agreeing to being treated by trainees as well as senior
colleagues, then prospectively we each have the right to consider this.
However it is quite ludicrous to claim to put patients, their
personal views and convenience at the centre of everything we do,
then steal their personal data which was given, at the time, in confidence.
If anyone would like to join in a detailed reply to Claire Gerada I'm
happy to help.
Julian
>There certainly appears to have been a reluctance by those organising
>the project to recognise that informed consent might be required.
>Justifying it purely on the grounds of the greater good feels like the
>sort of paternalism that was going out of fashion when I qualified in
>1981.
>
>Mike
>
>--
>Michael Leuty
>Nottingham, UK
|