 |
 |
Oh, dear, dear - Nanny knows best is alive and well. Whose blood & shit was it anyway? Who has to live with the body it came from, eh? Don't we just love to hang on to our secrets and do what we think is best for the patient, and perpetuate passivity - if we keep 'em dumb and blind they won't ask embarassing questions about what we don't know - despots have always been ace at this - 'coz they're the only ones with the complete picture. What would you think of the idealistic notion (supported by trends in ethics and law, at least in the western world) that the primary role of those who have a monopoly on medicine should be the relief of suffering and the enhancement of autonomy? Roll on the day when the UK gets decent freedom of info legislation. I predict a lot of this paternalism will be forced out by European legislation over the next decade. If Tony's plan for the NHS doesn't do it first. On the other hand Tony's plan suggests a lot of power shift and that's like moving a graveyard. Ho, ho - good thing it's nearly the end of summer and I'll lose the energy for riposte and theatre. Mike Ryan wrote at 9:47 on 16 August 2000 : > This issue has generated such interest that I have actually gone and got our > Trust Legal advisors to comment. They maintain that the person to provide > information to patients should be in a position to provide all the information > rather than merely a fragment which may be in conflict with the 'bigger > picture'. They advise that the GP or the primary requestor of the test is in > the best position to provide such a complete picture. > > Regards > > Mike Ryan > Antrim > - Bill Godolphin <[log in to unmask]> Pathology, UBC, Vancouver BC Canada V6T 2B5 tel: (604) 822-7701 fax: (604) 822-7635 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%