Skip to main content
Log in

Health Care Law

  • Feature
  • Published:
Health Care Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusion

The government has accepted the Nolan recommendations ‘in principle’ and the Whistleblower Protection Bill has all-party support. There seems to be agreement that ‘a new culture of openness and responsibility’ is needed and NHS staff should be among the first to benefit, with useful repercussions for the patients. The pressures to infringe the latter's privacy are not, however, likely to grow weaker, and have so far received little public attention: they should provoke a search for new data-processing methods which do not merely serve market management but are fully intelligible to patients, allow efficient retrieval for treatment purposes and are consistent with the preservation of patient confidentiality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The Times (1995). 21 June.

  2. Delany, L. (1994). Health care law.Health Care Analysis 2(2), 140–146.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Murray, I. (1995). Disabled pensioners win community care battle.The Times, 17 June.

  4. Delany, L. (1993). Health care law.Health Care Analysis 1(2), 170–178.

    Google Scholar 

References

  1. Conditional Fees Order 1995 andConditional Fees Regulations 1995.

  2. Lord Mackay. (1995). Reducing risks for clients.The Gazette 92/26, 5 July.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zander, M. (1995). Well anyway, conditional fees should be a bonanza for lawyers.New Law Journal 920.

References

  1. Kennedy, I. (1994). Between ourselves.Journal of Medical Ethics 20, 69–70, 100.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Department of Health. (1994).Confidentiality, Use and Disclosure of Personal Health Information. Draft Guidance, Department of Health, London.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Department of Health (1994).Confidentiality, Use and Disclosure of Personal Health Information. Draft Guidance, para. 4.9, Department of Health, London.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See, for example, the case ofX v Y [1988] 2 All ER 648.

  5. See, for example, the case ofW. v Egdell [1990] 1 All ER 835.

  6. Data Protection Registrar. (1994).Tenth Report of the Data Protection Registrar, HMSO, London.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Audit Commission. (1994).Setting the Records Straight: A Study of Hospital Medical Records, HMSO, London.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Craft, N. (1994). Secrecy in the NHS.British Medical Journal 309, 1640–1643.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Smith, R. (1994). An unfree NHS and medical press in an unfree society.British Medical Journal 309, 1644–1645.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Enacted by the National Health Service and Community care Act 1990.

  11. Department of Health National Health Service Management Executive. (1993).Guidance for Staff on Relations with the Public and the Media, Executive Letter (93)51, Department of Health, Leeds.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rose, N. (1995). Whistleblowing: time for a change?New Law Journal, 113–115.

  13. The Lord Nolan. (1995).First Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, Cm 2850-I, HMSO, London.

    Google Scholar 

  14. House of Commons. (28 June 1995).Official Report, Cols 911–912.

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delany, L. Health Care Law. Health Care Anal 3, 324–331 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02197080

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02197080

Keywords

Navigation