Adrian Canale-Parola writes:
> what's the current thinking on the release of patients' notes,
> with their consent, to a third party
Given patient consent, there is no privacy issue beyond ensuring that
the information gets to the right place. You can use registered post,
or save yourself the expense by telling the patient that he can call
in and collect a photocopy.
So the issues are (1) safety and (2) evidence.
Safety alone dictates that you send only a photocopy. Otherwise what do
you do when the patient gets sick one weekend when the solicitor's
office is shut?
As for evidence, I'm not a lawyer; but in all the various criminal
and civil cases which I've been involved in as an expert witness, the
documents actually shared with the other party have been photocopies.
There was one case in which a defendant wanted to see originals and
provision was made for him to turn up with his solicitor at New
Scotland Yard at a given time and look at them under supervision.
The reason for the supervision is that you have to keep the chain of
evidence tight at all times. Otherwise you risk strange tactical
plays such as patient, now using solicitor number 2, claiming that
solicitor number 1 must have accidentally lost some of the notes.
John Clegg objects:
> almost ineviatbly the notes that a solicitor wants are usually the
> fattest (notes, not patients!) and take forever to copy
What solicitors do is to have a page charge for photocopying that
includes staff time and other overheads. I don't know what it is
offhand but I expect that the Law Society have a standard rate. A
solicitor can't very well argue if you charge him that!
Ross
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|