Hospitals not respecting privacy.

[Bobby]

In the last year I have heard of 2 people who lost their car licenses after having a blood test at a hospital.

One person was diagnosed as having a mild stroke &
the other had a blood test that said there was an elevated
level of lactic acid in their blood which was a possible sign of a seizure causing unconsciousness.

In the 2nd case the person had been doing hard physical work and fell over.
He was mowing lawns and doing gardening so of course there
was an elevated level of lactic acid in his blood.
He fell over and hit his head but was OK.
He just rolled his ankle a bit on unlevel ground.
It was a normal fall that happens every day somewhere.

Anyway - both people arrived home
and it was only about a week later that they got a letter in the mail
saying they had lost their car license.

The hospitals had contacted the police and the police had written the letters.

In the 2nd case especially it was a false silly diagnosis
but it still stood & the guy couldn't drive his car for 6 months.

Shouldn't a blood test be private between you and your doctor?
What right has a hospital got to go behind your
back & dob you in to the police?

He asked a lawyer and apparently there was nothing he could do about it -
it was all legal.

So - what happened to our privacy?

You thought the blood test was for your benefit but
it was the state putting your license on the line.
Neither person was told that the blood test was for reasons of cancelling their license.

[brian ross]

Under the relevant legislation, the Hospitals are required to notify the Police when an adverse blood test occurs, Bobby. From a public safety viewpoint, it has been judged the best course of action to take. People are responsible for their actions and if a person has a seizure or a stroke, then they are unable to drive safely.

[FLEKTARN]

You can lose a car license over a stroke in Australia? That's new. I know people with strokes who drive nonetheless.

[Black Orchid]

Who else can access my pathology test results?
Pathology laboratories are bound by privacy laws regarding the use and release of personal information. This means pathology test results can only be released to health practitioners directly involved in the person’s care. Other potentially interested parties, including family members, cannot access pathology test results without the consent of the person who had the pathology test.

There are circumstances where pathology laboratories are required to release pathology test results to a third party such as:
when they are ordered by a court to do so
when they are required by law to send results of newly diagnosed cancers to Cancer Registries in each State or Territory, or report notifiable diseases, such as measles, to the relevant health authority.

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/publi ... uld-i-know

It doesn't say there that it is compulsory to share blood tests with the police.

It probably has something to do with the My Health Record thing where people sign their rights away so that all and sundry can gain access to their health record.

I opted out. I see no need for it.

[Bobby]

Under the relevant legislation, the Hospitals are required to notify the Police when an adverse blood test occurs, Bobby. From a public safety viewpoint, it has been judged the best course of action to take. People are responsible for their actions and if a person has a seizure or a stroke, then they are unable to drive safely.

I suppose the law says you have to be medically fit to drive
but I'm not a lawyer.
Notice that it happened behind those drivers backs?
They weren't told anything at the hospital.

Are they trying to avoid violence at hospitals by telling the patient the truth?

[Bobby]

Who else can access my pathology test results?
Pathology laboratories are bound by privacy laws regarding the use and release of personal information. This means pathology test results can only be released to health practitioners directly involved in the person’s care. Other potentially interested parties, including family members, cannot access pathology test results without the consent of the person who had the pathology test.

There are circumstances where pathology laboratories are required to release pathology test results to a third party such as:
when they are ordered by a court to do so
when they are required by law to send results of newly diagnosed cancers to Cancer Registries in each State or Territory, or report notifiable diseases, such as measles, to the relevant health authority.

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/publi ... uld-i-know

It doesn't say there that it is compulsory to share blood tests with the police.

It probably has something to do with the My Health Record thing where people sign their rights away so that all and sundry can gain access to their health record.

I opted out. I see no need for it.

This happened before the My Health record system went online.

[Black Orchid]

Maybe it's just a Victorian thing. I don't know for sure but I don't believe it happens in NSW.

[Bobby]

Maybe it's just a Victorian thing. I don't know for sure but I don't believe it happens in NSW.

It looks like any doctor can do it - anywhere in Australia -
just take away your license and
they don't even have to tell you to your face!

[Black Orchid]

Everything I have read says that you shouldn't drive for 2-4 weeks after a stroke and your doctor should clear you and that is certainly fair enough.

So again I think this is a Victorian thing.

[IQS.RLOW]

Who else can access my pathology test results?
Pathology laboratories are bound by privacy laws regarding the use and release of personal information. This means pathology test results can only be released to health practitioners directly involved in the person’s care. Other potentially interested parties, including family members, cannot access pathology test results without the consent of the person who had the pathology test.

There are circumstances where pathology laboratories are required to release pathology test results to a third party such as:
when they are ordered by a court to do so
when they are required by law to send results of newly diagnosed cancers to Cancer Registries in each State or Territory, or report notifiable diseases, such as measles, to the relevant health authority.

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/publi ... uld-i-know

It doesn't say there that it is compulsory to share blood tests with the police.

It probably has something to do with the My Health Record thing where people sign their rights away so that all and sundry can gain access to their health record.

I opted out. I see no need for it.

Pathology labs are privately run.
I would assume that the cases Bobby refers to occurred through the hospital via the public system.

Under the relevant legislation, the Hospitals are required to notify the Police when an adverse blood test occurs.

Bri Bri highlights why govt health services should be abolished.
Thanks Bri Bri