BMJ - PKI and signinng slight confusion

Brewis, Mark ukcrypto at maillist.ox.ac.uk
Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:55:51 +0100


I tried to find an answer to this several years ago (at an SfS.)  We came to
the conclusion that the NHS trust/GP owned paper records, in so far as they
owned the paper they were noted on, but that the IP in the information was
anyone's guess.  Certain epidemiological data is owned by the Secretary of
State, but this tends to be anonymous extracted data.

I agree with Dr Hassey that patients should own their records.  This, I
know, is the sort of opinion that gets you your own private stake at the
unbeliever barbeque.  The reluctance shown by some practices in releasing
records to patients under the Access to Medical Records Act is a good
indication of the general unwillingness to release control over data.


Mark Brewis 
EDS CLEF 
Systems Assurance Group 
Wavendon Tower, Milton Keynes, MK17 8LX. 
Tel: 01908 284234 
e@: mark.brewis@edl.uk.eds.com 
PGP Key ID: 
BA44 0B30 74DB EB02 D545 90FE 1BBC E1F6 0F58 F12A 



-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Gladman [mailto:brg@gladman.plus.com]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 2:18 PM
To: ukcrypto@maillist.ox.ac.uk
Subject: Re: BMJ - PKI and signinng slight confusion



----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr Alan Hassey" <alan.hassey@btinternet.com>
To: <ukcrypto@maillist.ox.ac.uk>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 12:17 PM
Subject: RE: BMJ - PKI and signinng slight confusion


> Each & every health professional has a legal (Data Protection Act),
> contractual & ethical obligation to protect privacy & get appropriate
> informed consent for disclosure. Ultimately the professions are accoutable
> through the courts, through professional regulation (GMC/UKCC etc) &
through
> the NHS Caldicott procedures (hopelessly under-resourced)
>
> There is no single organisation that holds records. NHS Trusts, hold
records
> as do GPs & they are nominally held on behalf of the Secretary of State.
> IMHO the patients own the records.... but that's probably a heretical view
> ;-(

Thanks again Alan - I guess that this means that no-one is responsible for
protecting them - a pretty sad state of affairs given that any lack of
integrity could easily be life threatening.

         Brian