Chapter 4

[Ian G Batten]

On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Watkin Simon wrote:
> (And my children's too.  Is that really the case?  But I don't want to get
> sidetracked on to medical privacy, let's stick to preventing and detecting
> crime.)

Perhaps not, but
http://www.observer.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,336271,00.html gives good
guidance on the extent to which the NHS, the government arm that for
most of us currently holds the most personal data, treats that trust.
All the following examples, if true, are reasons that the government
cannot be trusted with more confidential data if they cannot keep the
stuff they already hold remotely private.  And that's before we consider
section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001, which strikes me as a
paper Alderhay waiting to happen.

ian

. A 68-year-old man was refused a place in a care home when social
  services found from his medical records that he was gay.

. An uncle found out that his niece had a secret abortion when the
  company he worked for was asked to do a financial audit of the local
  health authority. He told her parents, who are very religious.

. A woman was sacked after her GP sent her records to her employer. The
  notes revealed that she had a history of mental health problems.

. Patients with medical conditions have been approached by researchers
  who have had access to their records.

. The medical histories of everyone living in Oxford are used without
  their knowledge by Oxford University for research. Names are removed,
  but patient groups claim individuals are identifiable through post
  codes.

. An MP was sent the medical records of a constituent without her
  consent. She found out only when the MP passed on the records to her.