George wrote:
> Subject: Re: PCG IT & Morbidity Recording
> In article <[log in to unmask]>, Ahmad Risk
> <[log in to unmask]> writes
> >Specifically, I keep records to look after individual patients, *not*
SNIP
> >the 'asker' to provide me with enough money to hire someone to do it.
>
>
> Wouldn't the Data Protection Act also have something to say about it,
> i.e. data that is kept for epidemiological or financial reasons rather
> than for 'personal care' which is our default remit?
>
> George
If we assume that we can class epidemiological work as 'research'
(and in this context we probably can) then provided the data are
suitably depersonalised, it is OK to collect it and to disclose it to
others.
However, I would need a LOT of persuading to believe that data which
is required for financial (ie accounting, costing and charging) can
be classed as 'research'! It seems to me it would be a bit dubious
to be passing it on, unless of course that was made explicit in the
original registration with the Data Protection Registrar. From what
I know, the Data Protection Registrar is none too keen on attempts to
retro-fit new purposes for collecting data, or new persons to whom
data will be disclosed.
Mike Wells
***************************************************
* M. Wells *
* 9 Hall Close *
* Bramhope *
* Leeds LS16 9JQ *
***************************************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|