That is an interesting point Pamela. We have many medical records relating to mental health and have had similar issues where when we consult the successor authority they suggest a fixed closure period which does not conform to FOI and DPA principles. I remember being told during FOI training (from TNA) that whilst we should consult such bodies as part of the decision making process we do not have to be tied to their view point if we feel we have good reason not to. I have often found that depositor bodies do not always have such a full or up to date understanding of the issues involved as we do as archive professionals, and nor should they necessarily. So we should be prepared to argue our case. We should always return to FOI and DPA principles as usually other suggestions are based on attempts to simplify that.
Sal
Sal Mager | Senior Archivist
Shropshire Archives
Museums and Archives Team • Shropshire Council
Castle Gates • Shrewsbury • SY1 2AQ
Tel: 01743 255357
Usual working days: Weds Thurs Fridays
-----Original Message-----
From: Archivists, conservators and records managers. <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Pamela Birch
Sent: 16 July 2020 17:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Names and ethics
Bedford BC - OFFICIAL-Unsecure
Like many county record offices my service holds medical records relating to mental health, which have been transferred to us by whatever health trust was around at the time but which have subsequently been treated as still under the control of the successor health trust in terms of decisions about access.
In recent years (last updated in 2013) the health trust that was at that time the successor to the transferring trust took the line that no access to individual records could be given until 75 years after death of the patient under the expectation of continuing confidentiality. The only exception being for claims on the estate of the deceased person. We have always thought this was rather long (indeed it was an increase on the restriction imposed by a previous trust) so when provision of mental health services transferred to a different trust we tried contacting them to ask if they would consider a different restriction or whether they agreed with the 75 years and could point to where this had come from. In spite of repeated attempts we have never received any reply from the present trust.
It has been interesting that no other comments on this thread have said that they have the same restrictions on their mental health case files as us. Other counties must come under the same trust. Have we been wrong all these years in listening to the trust and allowing them to control access to these records?
Pamela Birch
County Archivist (usually)
-----Original Message-----
From: Archivists, conservators and records managers. <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Sal Mager
Sent: 16 July 2020 16:28
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: Names and ethics
I agree with the points being made and it is always reassuring to hear that we are working along the right lines and according to the correct principles when deciding on access. However, my understanding of this was thrown into doubt when the guidance provided by TNA for the recent Infected Blood Inquiry included the following statement:
"TNA normally advises that information about deceased patients should remain closed to public access for 100 years from last date, to maintain public confidence in medical confidentiality (FOIA s.41 exemption, actionable breach of confidence)."
I have been meaning to seek further clarification on what they actually meant by this. It appears to advocate a fixed closure period and one which may extend for a period of up to 100 years after death. Or perhaps I am misinterpreting it. If all it is saying is that if a medical record is less than 100 years old it requires further investigation before release of any of the information in it, then I would agree with that. But it specifically talks about "information about deceased patients" rather than records containing this information. We tag such records as "Subject to individual application" but for specific information generally work on restrictions only applying for the 100 year lifespan plus a buffer zone of an undefined period for very sensitive records depending on circumstances (to account for breach of confidence actionable by next of kin) but this certainly wouldn't extend as far as 100 years after death.
Interested to hear other people's take on this.
Sal
Sal Mager | Senior Archivist
Shropshire Archives
Museums and Archives Team • Shropshire Council Castle Gates • Shrewsbury • SY1 2AQ
Tel: 01743 255357
Usual working days: Weds Thurs Fridays
For information about Coronavirus click here/image below [https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.shropshire.gov.uk%2fmedia%2f14732%2fcovid-19-feature-image.png&c=E,1,_ZoeLKwuvAPFCLO3-zq6g9TX5PqE02SFrW-cMpsz4NxUptrlrbSPBkekZwVvGeikb_f1ieaUsqwbaTJPU2VwlzrbV6fU8D1tv5F04-Wc&typo=1]<https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus>
******************************************************************************
If you are not the intended recipient of this email please do not send it on to others, open any attachments or file the email locally.
Please inform the sender of the error and then delete the original email.
******************************************************************************
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.jiscmail.ac.uk%2fcgi-bin%2fwebadmin%3fA0%3darchives-nra&c=E,1,OV5HwIvsRTn8_-ztiUY2Ce15JsJg4Fo5-cBXXgiq65WZJ7aaN--GTIvy0_l4_VaKOO8Nyik54-tnBwMgXV6VnhbQAVFVd7RnQUidByY6CE2Ablx0yncu&typo=1
Information security classification of this email: OFFICIAL-Unsecure
EMAIL CLASSIFICATION DEFINED:
*** OFFICIAL-INTERNAL: This message is intended for internal recipients only.
*** OFFICIAL-UNSECURE: This message and any attached file(s) do not contain personal or sensitive information which requires it to be sent encrypted.
*** OFFICIAL-SECURE: Either this message or any attached file contains either personal or commercially sensitive information that requires it to be sent encrypted.
All email traffic may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation. This email and any attached file are the property of Bedford Borough Council. Any opinions expressed in this mail do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Bedford Borough Council.
Bedford Borough Council is continuously working towards the requirements of the Public Sector Network and Data Protection legislation. Data Subjects may exercise their information rights by contacting [log in to unmask]
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
For information about Coronavirus click here/image below
[https://www.shropshire.gov.uk/media/14732/covid-19-feature-image.png]<https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus>
******************************************************************************
If you are not the intended recipient of this email please do not send it on
to others, open any attachments or file the email locally.
Please inform the sender of the error and then delete the original email.
******************************************************************************
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
