MEDICAL PRIVACY
Sut,—In a recent issue a doctor speaks highly of the value of medical records which had been compiled by various previous doctors on men they had to examine. Of course they would be useful, but there is another side to this matter. It is hardly to be expected that he asked the writer's leave to scrutinise them. And had they not presumably passed through a local insurance office or two and some been collected up by doctors' dispensers and secretaries? Doctors have to send these records in on demand. In fact, the cards have printed on them: "This record is the property of the Minister of Health."
Usually this will not do any harm, yet in some of mine there are (or should be) items highly discreditable to the man or woman concerned. One has always tried to keep such things to oneself, but the public at large—and larger, if the present scheme goes through—should be aware of the danger. It is far from easy for a doctor' to suppress such things— impossible, in fact, without keeping separate records. And, heaven knows, we have a surfeit of that already in making notes about trivial ailments and accidents. Mr. Churchill said something about Gestapo methods at the time of the last General Election.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
