Should I opt out of the NHS database? Opinions please

[cleanandclothed]

I have had the standard letter from our healthcare trust explaining about the new NHS database and that my records will be transferred on in the next 18 months or so, initially name, address, allegies and one or two other things I think, followed by increasing amounts of information later. I know there have been a lot of reservations about the security of this database, but I really don't feel I am well informed enough to make a decision. I have requested the 'further information and how to opt out'. Should I opt out? Opinions please? PS DH and I each got a letter, but nothing for DS. Should we be asked to consent for him?

I'm a bit at the security aspect TBH. Swipe card + password and voila; a whole host of sensitive info available. And following on from past cock ups with Child Benefit records and the armed forces database I don't have much faith.

That said as the parent of a child will serious health issues I can see the benefit.

There's info here.My own GP is pointing patients in the direction of this site which makes me think he's not too confident either.

I am biased because I am an NHS manager and I support centralised records. I would recommend opting in because the majority will opt-in by default and health services will be designed and delivered with the assumption of centrally held records.

It also allows someone (e.g. A&E, hospital outpatient appointment) to see your history and that will help them to understand you as a person, rather than just someone with a dodgy knee or diabetes. Safety wise I think it'll help reduce drug errors and over/under investigation.

On a personal level, DD and I will opt-in. The firewalls and security are pretty strong and it's hard to access patient level data. For example, I can look at information of over 400,000 people where I live but can't identify any individual. Not quite as simple as swipecard and password and off you go.

Presumably others can identify individuals Queen? Do you have different access levels to clinical staff?

With any health IT system there are different levels of access, as a nurse i can usually have a high level of access but have to be throughly checked in terms of my identity first and even then my usage of the system is monitored.

I work for the NHS and have opted out.

I think there are pros and cons...

Pros, if you have a complex medical history, it will be invaluable for the staff working with you to access your record.
If you are in an accident, again, could be v useful.

Cons, no evidence as yet as to how this system will work, ie who can access your info.

Am not convinced that confidentiality will be as securely maintained. At the minute, GP's are very careful about sharing your medical record.

I am very concerned that in the future, other agencies will find reasons to access these records eg police and social services.

I am also concerned that in cases of domestic abuse, abusers may be able to track victims down if they can access the system or find someone to do it for them.

I sound cynical, but that comes from years of working with NHS IT systems.

I think I may opt out - at least until the security is proven (or not). But will probably advise dd to opt in on the basis of her complex health issues.

Fleegle, I agree that it will probably lead to sharing with other agencies. But with the domestic abuse example, which happens quite regularly, it would be easier to flag across all settings that there is a safeguarding concern, rather than giving abusers multiple opportunities to try and get access to information (as my abusive ex did).

Not as convinced as you about GPs keeping strict confidentiality. The stuff GPs tell me or let me see about patients is sometimes quite surprising.

Pleasedelete, yes others can access different levels, but for example an A&E nurse wouldn't be able to cruise the records at random, only for patients who are in the department. I don't think any single group of people (except probably the IT staff) would be able to see all information about all people.

so glad to see this thread as dh and i were having the same conversation earlier. My gut feeling is to opt out - none of us have any serious existing medical condition.

Apparently we have to decide on our children's behalf. I presume that if I opt out on behalf of my 13-yr-old, if they decide in 3 years' time they DO want to on the care record, it can be done?

Queenofwhatever.. Yes, good point about being able to flag safeguarding issues. I still think that there is an increased risk of information being available more easily via the system, to those who would misuse it.

For a lot of people, it may be that the risks are outweighed by the benefits.

I think that the amount of information held about us all is concerning anyway, so access should be tightly monitored. This includes Contact Point- where information (names, addresses, DOB) for all children will be held, whether you agree to it or not. Contact point is coming to all areas gradually, but not much publicised

I'll always opt in. I'm naive I guess but I can't really imagine any reason not to. As a previous GP's secretary I think the damage done by inadequate, incomplete or just plain absent records is massively more of a problem than some random stranger posting my contraceptive history on the internet. I'll be interested to follow the thread though to see if I change my mind.

Thanks everyone, keep the opinions coming - great to get a balanced view from both sides.

i dont know what harm could be done really even if the whole world knew when i last saw my gp, how many times ive had certain meds, my blood type, whether i take the pill or not, etc. i think people seem to be getting more and more cautious about giving out information... but not sure why?
what harm can it do? none.
what good can it do? - probably quite a bit if i had an accident or the doctor's surgery records were lost.
maybe im too liberal lol...

My first reaction to this is always that records are pretty insecure at the moment, and useless for sharing information that needs to be shared for decent care.

If it was the other way around - records already held on a central database but we were planning to move to a paper system - I would view it as a potential disaster. What scope for lost information, info not getting to the right people, individual records getting lost/picked up.

I've worked in a hospital (research) and been amazed by the lack of care taken over paper records. Piles of them in crates, lugged about by porters.

It might be difficult for Joe Public to get at records, but for many people working in a hospital environment it isn't.

With a computerised system you have tracking of who has looked at what and when, as well as barriers to accessing all but the necessary records. And information sharing isn't some bogeyman to me - it makes sense. I'm opting in.