BT 2006 trials of Phorm

[Mary Hawking]

In message <20080606142701.27761.76497.Mailman@chiark.greenend.org.uk>, 
ukcrypto-request@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes

>The vast majority of peoples' medical records aren't that  interesting. 
>Hence the vanishing small number of people opting out of  NHS records: 
>they regard any slight increase in utility and being  worth any large 
>decrease in privacy.  There are, of course, people  whose medical 
>records _would_ cause them difficulty, and I have 93C3'd my records 
>partly in solidarity with them.  But I would be totally unconcerned, at 
>a personal level, about arbitrary read-only access to my medical 
>records, and I bet you the same applies to a solid majority  of the 
>population.
>

One of the problems here is that, if the SSEPR (Single Shared Electronic 
Patient Record - such as SystmOne - in existence - and Lorenzo level 4 - 
which may turn out not to be vapourware) is implemented, the chances of 
the record being accurate and responsibility clearly assigned, decrease 
considerably.

Bad enough to be deported for belonging to the wrong ethnic group: would 
it be worse if you didn't belong to the group, and information had been 
entered  erroneously, maliciously or the system mis-interpreted the 
information?

What is the Clinical Governance of these records?
If it is assumed that the records are accurate, how would that accuracy 
be maintained?

Bw

Mary Hawking

PS I still don't see how setting the consent flag to no spine record 
would help in the case of SSEPRs....
-- 
Mary Hawking