Close X
Get more out of WDDTY.com
by joining the site for free
Free 17-point plan to great health
Twice weekly e-news bulletins
Access to our News, Forums and Blogs
Sign up for free and claim your
17-point plan to great health
Free 17-point plan to great health

Twice weekly e-news bulletins

Access to our News, Forums and Blogs
OR

If you want to read our in-depth research articles or
have our amazing magazine delivered to your home
each month, then you have to pay.


Click here if you're interested
Helping you make better health choices

What Doctors Don't Tell You

In shops now or delivered to your home from only £3.50 an issue!

Subscribe!
August 2018 (Vol. 3 Issue 6)

The access to records act

About the author: 

The access to records act image

The Patient's Access to Records' Act has been trumpeted by the DOH as giving patients "full access to their health records

The Patient's Access to Records' Act has been trumpeted by the DOH as giving patients "full access to their health records." It imposes a "duty on all holders of health records to disclose information," says the DOH (our italics). All very admirable and about time too, you might think. The reality, however, is a little less impressive. The Act has serious flaws which water down its provisions and could make them almost impossible to enforce in the face of an obstructive doctor.

The first problem is what the Act doesn't cover. It is not retrospective no health records written before 1 November 1991 are covered. The rationale for this is that doctors may want to temper their comments if they know they may be read by the person they are about. With cases of records including comments like: "Mr X thinks more of his cat than his wife"; and "NFN", which on further investigation turned out to mean "Normal for Norfolk", it is not hard to see why. It is also telling that the British Medical Association felt obliged to advise members that, with the advent of the Act: "Health records should be legible and factual." Presumably, this kind of thing wasn't so important if they were being read only by other doctors.The other omission is records held by practitioners of alternative medicine.

The Act provides for all or part of a record to be withheld if the recordholder thinks it would do you serious mental or physical harm if it were revealed. A doctor can secretly withhold the whole of a record or show you an incomplete record

The Act has been strongly condemned by consumer and medical groups alike for failing to set up a complaints or appeals procedure. Very often, particularly with GPs' notes, it will be the doctor who compiled the record who has sole discretion as to whether or not you can see it. If you suspect information is being wrongly withheld, your only recourse is to go to court. However, because the doctor is not obliged to give you any kind of explanation, you have no way of knowing whether you may be wasting your time and money because he is withholding information correctly under the Act or whether he's simply being bloody minded. Put simply, going to court is the only way you can find out if you've got a case.

Your only other option is to change your GP and reapply for access: it is the current recordholder who decides, without having to refer to any previous holder.


Natural prevention image

Natural prevention

Case study: The risks of HRT image

Case study: The risks of HRT

You may also be interested in...

Latest Tweet

About

Since 1989, WDDTY has provided thousands of resources on how to beat asthma, arthritis, depression and many other chronic conditions..

Start by looking in our fully searchable database, active and friendly community forums and the latest health news.

Positive SSL Wildcard

Facebook Twitter

© 2010 - 2018 WDDTY Publishing Ltd.
All Rights Reserved