Rudd Govt to abolish patient privacy

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has slammed draft legislation brought forward by the Federal Government, which will allow it the right to access individual patients' records.

This is 'Big Brother' at its worst.

Dr Rosanna Capolingua

The draft, which the AMA said had been released last Thursday night before the Easter long weekend, would mean the government had the power to "require a document, extract or copy containing health information (within the definition of the Privacy ACT 1988) about an individual".

The legislation had its grounds in making it possible for the government to conduct administrative checks, according to the AMA.

"It is remarkable that a government should take such a step as to violate your personal medical record. This is 'Big Brother' at its worst," the association's president, Dr Rosanna Capolingua, said in a statement.

"This is an act of bureaucratic voyeurism that strips patients of all rights to privacy. It presses the face of government at the keyhole of every surgery in the country. Doctors will be compelled to hand over highly sensitive medical information to justify Medicare claims potentially including a patient's intimate concerns and examination findings, their test results, weight, sexual health, infections ... nothing is protected.

"Worse still, under this legislation patients don't even have the right to know that their records are being accessed. There is no compulsion to even advise patients, let alone seek their permission," Capolingua said.

"Government has no business accessing these records. This information is between the doctor and the patient, and must remain so," she concluded.

There has been a lot of attention on health record privacy in recent times with the attempts to introduce national electronic health records, as they would make private information more readily available. The government is facing the need to pass new legislation to make the introduction of an individual health identifier possible, which the National e-health Transition Authority believed would take until next year.

The office of Federal Minister for Health and Aging Nicola Roxon was unable to provide comment in time for this article.

Advertisement

Talkback 17 comments

    True to form Anonymous -- 15/04/09

    First the union officials are allowed unfettered access to our employment and earnings records without our permission or even knowledge, now the political arm of the unions will be availing itself of the same privilege with regard to our medical records. Someone ought to tell the Labor party that 1984 was a novel, not an instruction manual...

    unions? Anonymous -- 15/04/09 (in reply to #320129885)

    Yes this is an invasion of privacy, which the Rudd government should be ashamed of (amongst many other disgraceful new policies)!

    But just how you manage to inlcude a little reds under the bed, Howard scaremongering, union bashing is anyones guess?

    I'd much rather have a union delegate who knows what I am entitled to, looking at the books than a Telstra like manager who says, bend over, trust me!

    Re: unions John -- 15/04/09 (in reply to #320129888)

    So you are obviously not a Telstra fan eh? Just how the hell did you manage to bring Telstra into this. I also agree with the previous post and am beginning to have serious concerns as to where your beloved Chairman Rudd and his red cohort Dillard are taking this country. I personally would put my trust in a Telstra manager rather than a half witted union thug...they are increasingly becoming irrelevant and comments such as yours (way off topic) are the reason why.

    off topic Simon -- 15/04/09 (in reply to #320129889)

    I agree, how did unions come into this discussion? Given how few people are involved with unions these days, it's a big stretch to say the Labor party are the union political wing any more - 85% of those who voted Labor are not union members. More likely to be the christian "unions" than worker's collectives.

    Stats? Anonymous -- 15/04/09 (in reply to #320129891)

    85% you say Simon? Please supply the stats to prove that, I'm sure we'd all like to see them!

    Or was that just an uneducated guess from an uneducated Liberal party stooge?

    uneducated guess Simon -- 17/04/09 (in reply to #320129891)

    Yeah, you are right, its' 85% of total voters are not union members. (11M voters, 1.7M union members)
    If you assume that all union members voted labor (which they didn't, a large number to green and some to Libs etc) then 28.3% of the labor vote were union members. Thus, 2/3 of Labor voters are not union members.

    I am not ashamed to say that I've voted Labor since 1975 and will happily criticise them when they deserve it.

    Mr crediible Anonymous -- 17/04/09 (in reply to #320130245)

    Oh ok, so you admit it was all bull...t as your stats have already gone from 85% non union members who vote Labor, down to 66.6%. Wow there must have been mass union sign ups in two days?

    Thanks for that most credible info, plucked from thin air, Simon.

    John (Howard?) Anonymous -- 15/04/09 (in reply to #320129889)

    I managed to bring Telstra into the discussions, just as anonymous did the unions! But you ignore the initial comment and the parts which don't suit your little games, won't you John.

    Plus my comments were no more off topic than the original, John (John who obviously likes to be pedantic and sounds just like every other Liberal clone, one in particular????).

    But you feel free to trust that wonderful trustworthy manager John and when the wonderful manager decides that due to monetary restrictions, you are expendable, as they always do (look at Pac Brands, EDS and Telstra amongst many others), who will you an unemployed half witted anti union propagandist, then go cap in hand to?

    There are devils everywhere Anonymous -- 16/04/09 (in reply to #320129885)

    I can see this as a means of checking on overservicing in the name of keeping your medicare costs in check etc. But surely more public servents isn't the answer. Hey lets next start on legal aid too the gov may pay your legal fees so they don't need to worry about client lawyer confidentiality either. And what will stop the medicare neighbour looking at what treatments their much loved neighbour has had. The investigated needs to know by whom as a minimum. After all it's offence to notify a person in NSW if a tracking device is found on your car by the local mechanic why should we care about our right to know.

    No privacy laws Peter Lockwood -- 15/04/09

    For years there was attempts to introduce privacy laws the same as overseas..NO one in Australia gave a dam...so there you have it folks you ALL asked for it. Next will be your bank accounts....Internet CENSORSHIP is next...Dont you love Kevin07

    not just kevin '07 Anonymous -- 15/04/09 (in reply to #320129904)

    not just kevin '07, we let howard '58 get away with no demonstrations, no strikes and generically letting the government dictate terms to our civil liberties, due to *terrorism*.

    this is the evolutionary result. doesn't matter who is in power if you give the bastar?s and inch they will take a mile.

    we will never learn or we will learn....the hard way.

    Little Hitler Mel Sommersberg -- 15/04/09

    "The office of Federal Minister for Health and Aging Nicola Roxon was unable to provide comment in time for this article."

    Ms Roxon is too busy sitting on her brain to comprehend the weight of what she is doing. The Commonwealth should not be involved in health at all, except for the amount of funding they provide to the states. The Commonwealth has no constitutional authority to interfere.

    This government is comprised of a bunch of moronic airheads.

    Heil Adolf Rudd and Joseph Rudd! Anonymous -- 16/04/09

    Kevin Rudd prefers the visible fist rather than the Adam Smith invisible hand. Union thugs now seem to be able to invade private employment records. Invasion of private medical records is another of Rudd's fist blows
    .
    Also Rudd usually only blamed Wall Street when the US politicians abolished the Glass Segal regulations that caused the Global Financial Press.

    Dont forget too... Anonymous -- 16/04/09 (in reply to #320130054)

    Mussolini Rudd and Idi Amin Rudd.

    Rudd even shamefully sent hooded terrorists, trained in the middle east, to the wharves to attack Australians at work and recklessly, sent our troops on an ideological wild goose chase to find WMD which don't exist. But at least we now have plenty of oil.

    Oh wait, sorry, wrong Prime Minister, that was the other Adolf, Mussolini, Amin, Howard, wasn't it? My mistake.

    Oh Kevvy, this is a mistake! Rex Alfie Lee -- 16/04/09

    Whilst I see this as no different to Johnnie's ID card it is wrong either way. You can't do this & you won't get away with it. You will fail on this one because this is a mockery of a democracy. Get off this bandwagon. There have been no precedents set that would ever support Big Brother''s infiltration of our personal health states. This would be your end Kevin, coming from someone who was your supporter.

    Rudd Govt to abolish patient privacy Anonymous -- 17/04/09

    i can see this coming, more revenue for the government from insurance companies and whoever wants to buy public infomation

    so what? Davo -- 17/04/09

    For me, I couldn't care less about who sees my medical records, so long as they can't see my phone/address details. If it helps make medical expenses cheaper, go for it.

    I couldn't care less about "public" information, what I object to is censorship or restricting my access to information.

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

Tags

Back to top

Featured