Hmm hmm hmm.
- How would you feel about allowing researchers to see the information in your medical records? Would you allow them access to your records? And how about your child(ren)'s records?
Not happy. It's just too broad. And I say this as someone who has been in a clinical study. It doesn't sound as though there would be any way to control what parts of your records researchers could and couldn't see, or to know what studies your data had been used in. These things might be important to an awful lot of people.
I think I would be especially unhappy about this if I had a condition that was rare enough to make me identifiable. There are plenty of people for whom this is true.
I'd also be concerned about the repercussions of research that was able to predict inherited conditions - my family has already refused to take part in studies into an untreatable disease occurring in our family that probably has a large genetic component. We are worried about individual family members not being able to obtain health insurance in some parts of the world if it was possible to predict through genetic testing that any given individual was going to develop the disease. This is doubly worrying given the way the NHS is going - if we moved over to an insurance system in future, would we be able to get insurance in our own country if research from studies using our records predicted we were going to develop the disease? Would insurance companies ever be able to gain access to our data?
I'd also be unhappy about the idea of the NHS potentially in the future using access to health records for researchers as a source of income. People from all over the world would want to use this data. I can't see the NHS resisting the temptation to use it as a money spinner.
Having actually done human subjects research in a university, and having had to pass university and public ethics committees, I also honestly don't think you'd ever be able to meaningfully consent the public if we're talking about a blanket, for-life consent to any research that might ever be done with their data or how it might ever be stored in the future. I would not be personally happy about consenting people in this way myself because I think there's a good chance the average member of the public is not scientifically literate enough to understand everything that might ever be done with their data or where it might end up. It wouldn't be acceptable in my field for subjects not to be able to trace exactly what pieces of research their data has been used in. So I have serious concerns about the ethics of this form of consent.
I would only allow access to my records if I could control exactly what parts of my records were released, and know which studies the data would be used in. I would then only permit data to be used in wide scale, coarse grained studies like the smoking one. But this is going to be impractical when scaled up to the whole population.
- Would it matter to you where the researchers work i.e. for a University or industry, if the same safeguards about anonymity and confidentiality were in place?
Universities - slightly less bad than industry. But my main concern is about meaningful consent and to what extent you'd be able to control your own information.
- What do you think is the most important safeguard for the Department of Health to put in place to reassure patients about information from their medical records being used?
There is really no safeguard you could put in place that would reassure me about this.