Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

What are the pros and cons of signing up to this new national medical records database?

6 replies

SpeedyGonzalez · 18/03/2010 23:35

I am thinking of opting out until I know more. Anyone have any useful info/ can point me in the right direction to get a balanced viewpoint?

OP posts:
RTKangaMummy · 19/03/2010 00:00

basically your GP will have a handout that you can get for info

also chat to them if you are worried what info will be on it

IMHO it is a good thing if your history is completcated so that nothing is left off when you are seen in A&E or hospital or out of hours GP or on holiday in UK

I just hope they don't lose the data on a train stored on a CD ROM

3littlefrogs · 19/03/2010 00:03

In principle it is a good idea I suppose. Whilst many people have a good understanding and recall of their medical history and existing ailments, an equally large number haven't a clue, and with every thing being computerised these days, if confronted with a sick person, on a home visit for example, one can really be working in the dark.

(However, a computerised record would be no help in that situation anyway).

The number of times I have had conversations along the lines of:

Are you on any medication?

Oh yes, lots of pills.

Do you know what they are called?

No

Do you know why you are taking them?

No

Have you had any operations or illnesses?

Oh yes I was in hospital for an operation last year.

Do you know what you had done?

No, but it was on my tummy......

ATM every hospital and GP practice has a different system - not just for patient records, but for lab results, correspondance, appointments etc. None of these systems interface or talk to each other.

A single system used by everyone would help there.

The biggest worry, in my mind, is the fact that every computer system commissioned by government has been insecure and open to hacking and abuse. This, I feel, is where the problem lies.

So - in summary:

A centralised summarised record would be useful, but not secure or confidential, and only useful to HCP if one happened to have a computer handy, and if one was able to recall all the passwords necessary to access the information.

Don't know if that is any help.......

purplepeony · 19/03/2010 16:05

I have opted out mainly because I keep reading that drs themselves are not in favour of it due to confidentiality issues. Government computer systems never seem to work.

The point surely is that we have survived for ages without it- so why now?

My PCT tried to "sell it" to me via a brochure on the basis that if I was admitted to A&E all the info they needed would be in my notes. well, if I am admitted to A&E for anything life threatening, I hope they will just keep me alive! They can take bloods and get results quickly, and anyone with any severe allergies etc should/does carry a medi-alert.

Moreover, if the Tory's are the next government , which looks likely, they want to scrap it anyway as they think it's a waste of money.

SpeedyGonzalez · 20/03/2010 17:05

Thanks for your info, everyone, it seems the cons are pretty much as I expected. Thankfully my health is good and medical history uncomplicated. Think I'll opt out.

OP posts:
aliasdictus · 21/03/2010 00:44

The government have made a great display and selling point about having immediate access to all one's records in an emergency, this is a selling point to us and not strictly true.

Over 130,000 people will have permissible access to this data, however, more worrying is the other agencies who have already asked for access like the police. In time they and insurance companies will be granted access for 'legal purposes' which will be sold to us as bringing great benefit, diagnosing cancer in young children is always a vote-winner. Once DNA unravelling becomes cheap and cheerful this will also be added giving insurance companies huge power over life assurance risks, mortgages and the like.

Someone will identify a 'gay' gene or 'paedophile' gene, a redtop tabloid will then feel completely justified in publishing all details 'to protect the innocent' etc etc. The whole thing is worrying and I have met many of the programmers on the database whose attitude is 'they themselves are healthy and don't have any problem with it so why should anyone else' which actually misses the point. The past record of government and NHS computers is abysmal and confidentiality is seen as low importance, loss of data on data sticks, CDs and laptops occurs so often that you should only regard your medical history as being as secure as email.

The majority of doctors are NOT themselves going to be added and I suggest we decline for the moment until we can be absolutely sure about the motives and confidentiality issues.

thelunar66 · 21/03/2010 00:59

What worries me is insurance companies being granted access in the future. My mother had breast cancer, so I am high risk. Does this mean i will become uninsurable? What if you have the gene for Alzheimers etc?

I feel very uncomfortable actually.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread