They certainly dont want you to think opting out is the norm do they!

Just had my SCR notification through from the local trust. Lots of blah blah blah important for you…save your life…you're mad if you opt out…we'll keeping adding information to it as we make it up….etc.

To opt out you have to go to their website and print out an opt out form to send to your local GP. They dont enclose an opt out form with their mailing in the first place…cant think why not….

My favourite bit on the form: "If I do not have a summary care record The NHS will do its best to provide you with safe, efficient care whether or not you have a SCR"

Or in other words: "we may kill you but its your fault now!" 👿

"What does it mean if I DO NOT have a summary care record?"

Blah blah blah…you'll die…blah blah blah

where's my foil hat?

Many of the docs agree with you, comrade. Now, I'm not hugely bothered about clinical staff having instant access to my medical history in an emergency – but I don't trust the system to safeguard the data. Therein lies the rub.

Exercise your rights.

already printed out and filled in for me, Mrs Stoner and Stoner Jr.

opt out form here:
http://www.worcestershire.nhs.uk/file_download.aspx?id=a59acd61-c6de-4304-b74f-0b38a8d83a91

It's almost funny that Caldicott Principles are drilled into health professionals – no such concerns for the large scale commissioning of leaky sieves IT.

I would have [more] more to say on this subject, but I've three days off – and I've got to fight my way across London for a hot date (er, conference) at the British Museum.

ps libertarian jibe on other thread not directed at you, comrade – just an observation on the wooliness of think-tank… thinking. 😀

ps libertarian jibe on other thread not directed at you, comrade

you go back on the christmas card list.

nurse-shaped conference p'raps?

Not really arsed to be honest. I couldnt give a hoot if someone would go to the lengths of hacking the NHS to find out about my piles.

nurse-shaped conference p'raps?

Nah, this. My other life, as it were.

Right, bring on the underground…

Not really followed this too closely. If we're concerned about privacy then why is opting out of the new secure, audited database preferable to remaining scattered through various home grown databases and paper notes?

Well I'm in the don't care boat and rather have them know my medical history then have to guess it and maybe just maybe it'll make it easy for me at work.

Same as Graham and Drac. I can imagine people who might be in the public limelight might want to opt out, but I'm not.
Anyway, all my bank details are available online, which strikes me as more risky than a Nigerian finding out that I don't have any recorded allergies.
But yeah, the bumpf through the post was a little one sided.
The bit I loved was when it described all the fantastic security features the system has, but then in the small print buried towards the end casually mentions that not all these security systems will initially exist and the PCT will choose what they think is appropriate. So that will be an admin account with the username 'admin' and password of 'password' set up for a temp admin assistant who's just got her Microsoft mouse users certificate. 😉

If we're concerned about privacy then why is opting out of the new secure, audited database preferable to remaining scattered through various home grown databases and paper notes?

Because it's cool to opt out of this.

new secure, audited database preferable to remaining scattered through various home grown databases and paper notes

Because if someone gives away your data now, they'd have to be someone pretty local to you, or who has dealt with you.

Whereas under the new system, basically anyone who has £100 to spend will be able to look at your medical records, same as is the case with the DVLA, Police computer etc.

Joe

what he said —————-^

What exactly is a hacker going to do with the information that I took last week off sick and don't get on to well with NSAID's

Went to the docs the other day, before I'd even sat down she already knew what the symptoms were, what my medical history was, what previous test results showed etc etc etc.

Quick piss in a pot, few questions and she'd rulled out all the niggling bits from my medical history so we could just put this one down to a visus rather than anything more sinister.

If you've ever had treatment at 4+ different locations for the same problem you'll realise the benifit of everyone having access to the same info, rather than spending the first 20min of a 30min consultation having to go though a list of dates and tests off the top of your head becasue the doc only has a 3" folder of notes to read on you and only 30min to treat you.

Just hope anyone opting out doesn't have the type of medical history that would benefit from been known – but no doubt they are the same type of people who'd sue the NHS for not knowing…

likewise, potentially going to be very useful – I have no issues at all with it.

Why the belittling of people who opt out?
Don't you think that just maybe they took an educated decision, like you did, but came to different conclusion? They are allowed to have a different opinion.

Because if someone gives away your data now, they'd have to be someone pretty local to you, or who has dealt with you.

if the risk is from illegal access then try this: call up your GP and say in an authorative voice "Hi this is Dr x from local hospital. We've had a patient of yours admitted, a Mr Y, date of birth xxxxx, from 123 Acacia Avenue. Could you fax through his medical history to this number…"

I don't live in Acacia Avenue so that just wouldn't work.

😉

Why the belittling of people who opt out?
Don't you think that just maybe they took an educated decision, like you did, but came to different conclusion? They are allowed to have a different opinion.

I'm not belittling anyone. I'm questioning their decision so I can assess if my own position is the correct one (for me) or if perhaps they had considered some aspect that I had not.

I don't live in Acacia Avenue so that just wouldn't work.

Aaah but Mr Y does. 🙂

For me the worry wouldn't be the hacking or accidental disclosure of details on the database, but the governments (of any party) willingness to release information to comercial organisations for a nominal fee. It would pass all auditing and safeguards because it is allowed.

Until it is enshrined in law that data can only be used for the purpose for which it is collected, NO EXCEPTIONS, then I would opt out of any database I have the option to.

For me the worry wouldn't be the hacking or accidental disclosure of details on the database, but the governments (of any party) willingness to release information to comercial organisations for a nominal fee. It would pass all auditing and safeguards because it is allowed.

Exactly – I don't care about some hacker finding out about my piles, but when I decide to renew my car insurance and find I can't because of a heart murmur 10 years ago…

Until it is enshrined in law that data can only be used for the purpose for which it is collected, NO EXCEPTIONS, then I would opt out of any database I have the option to.

That doesn't work, either. Laws have been known to change. The best solution is to not collate the data in the first place.

Until it is enshrined in law that data can only be used for the purpose for which it is collected, NO EXCEPTIONS, then I would opt out of any database I have the option to.

So you've opted out of your current GP's system of collating your medical records into whatever IT system they have now?

The best solution is to not collate the data in the first place.

Your data is already being collated – by your GP, your Dentist, by any hospital you have visited as a patient.

Having data accessible to professionals to see your current medication, allergies and summary medical history is a good thing.

Until it is enshrined in law that data can only be used for the purpose for which it is collected, NO EXCEPTIONS, then I would opt out of any database I have the option to.

I'm not too sure that I'd want that, though I understand your sentiments. Data often has very useful positive uses outside what was original envisioned of it. What I'd want I'd guess is preservation of anonymity to 3rd party users of data.

Presumably US Homeland Security have insisted on access.

I think the problem with the data security was due to it being hosted in the US where data protection and privacy are not exactly rigourous.
Anyway foil hat back on now

Only an issue for the terminally self-important

I think the problem with the data security was due to it being hosted in the US where data protection and privacy are not exactly rigourous.

Where is your information source to back that up Sandwich – it is not hosted in the US.

If you think that the NHShIT project is designed to improve your medical care by ensuring that doctors and nurses know your past medical history then I'm afraid you're all giving the politicians and bean counters the benefit of far too much doubt. That is not what it's for and one could argue that we don't really need it for that anyway since, for example, my secretary can usually easily get hold of a faxed copy of a patient's old anaesthetic chart from a different hospital elsewhere in the UK with a quick 'phone call.

It might be useful for research, for example by allowing the collection of data on the effectiveness of a particular medication on a nationwide basis.

Its real benefit is to allow the collection of a huge quantity of data on socio-economic aspects of health care to facilitate the further privatisation of your NHS. The big problem at the moment is that it's very difficult to cost a lot of NHS activity and that's what needs to be figured out if the NHS is going to be run like easyjet (and believe me that's where were heading).

..my secretary can usually easily get hold of a faxed copy of a patient's old anaesthetic chart from a different hospital elsewhere in the UK with a quick 'phone call.

see? I don't know why we'd want a new system. The existing one is clearly very secure. 🙄