RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Lincolnshire => Topic started by: Eilleen on Sunday 14 August 16 13:17 BST (UK)
-
Hi :)
Felt I should share this,
A gentleman who has not got long to live , tried to get information on his Mother who had been in St Johns hospital from 1944 to her death in 1979.
someone checked and looked at the file's , found them ,requested £40 to release information after checking with NHS,
information is near useless , can have said papers from 2044 to 2079 in drib's and drabs,
the person looking and anyone else in authority can read these papers on his Mother, but He is not allowed , something not right somewhere.
gripe over, but be warned if papers you wish to see are in archives , you do have to wait until you are dead to access them ::)
-
We often get asked by doctors or opticians whether there is a history of something or other in our family.
-
Scouseboy , I expected to be shot down in flames :)
but what you say is true .
This Gentleman when first looking for information on his Mother's hospital papers ,
was about to become a Father ,
they did not even bother to pass on information like .
your Mother had premature twins , your Mother was deaf and dumb .
just wants to make Me cry, and then rant :)
-
Things changed about 25 to 30 years ago as regards medical confidentiality, I believe.
Doctors and specialists could use their own discretion 30 years ago.
-
Doctors maybe , but not modern day archives.
Like I said it just seems wrong to Me that someone in an office can read these file's
but next of kin cannot,
I understand if it is just some noisy person who want's to know ::)
but not when it is the son of the deceased.
-
Sometimes, the confidentiality policy can be counter-productive to the health of the family, in my experience.
And they are not consistent, so you do not know wheter to believe them or not.
Things were better in the good old days.
-
:) :)
I am not so sure about better in the good old day's ::)
The lady I mentioned was put there by her husband who was a doctor ::)
never to be let out again . plus much more that I dare not mention on an open board :o
-
.... someone checked and looked at the file's , found them ,requested £40 to release information after checking with NHS,
information is near useless , can have said papers from 2044 to 2079 in drib's and drabs,
...
What was the £40 payment for?
Just a thought .... might it be worth asking again? Perhaps you will deal with a different Archivist who is more understanding or has a different interpretation of the rules/regulations. If you have no luck, ask to speak to someone higher up - sometimes there are ways around these rules (you just need to find out what they are).
You would think that there must be some way that your friend can see his mother's hospital records, especially considering his personal circumstances.
-
The £40 was payment to get permission off the NHS.
to release the hardly nothing information allowed to be sent ,
it did not even give address she had lived at ::)
The information sent did say there was a lot that they could not let him have until starting in 2044 ::)
-
Understandably, the NHS has to follow rules regarding access to confidential patient data.
See here:
http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/access-to-someone-elses-medical-or-health-records.aspx?CategoryID=68&SubCategoryID=160
-
Thanks for that KGarrad. :)
so regarding dead people , it say's kept for 10 years then destroyed ???
The papers for St John's mental hospital , much come under a different rule,
because He has been told He can see them in 2044 ::)
-
The basic principle is that no one has the right to see another person's medical or mental health records!
All you can do is to ask - and the record keeper MAY allow access.
How much they charge for the privilege is up to them, I think?
Hospital records for "Mentally disordered persons within the meaning of any Mental Health Act" are normally retained for 20 years after the last contact.
-
And there lie's my point, :)
people who are archiving them have a right to see them, but not family .
and don't say " well that's their job "
some of these archives are done by volunteer's ;)
and a very good job they do I might add :-* before I get removed from the site :)
what I am saying from His point of view and mine . is that it is not fair ;)
-
"people who are archiving them have a right to see them, but not family" The people working in the Archives are not sitting around in the back reading the files (they will be stored and only pulled out when request is made) and the son is being allowed to get photocopies if he wishes to do so.
Each Archives will usually have policies and procedures to deal with requests from the public which include fees to charge. It may be that a large portion of the fee is to cover photocopying pages from the file and staff time needed to do the copying will likely be calculated as well.
-
aghadowey , thank you for that explanation .
just because archiving give's them the right to see them , and not family .
does not mean that people like Me should not voice my opinion on how I feel about this .
and the son is being allowed to get photocopies if he wishes to do so. ??
has something happened since I spoke to him on the phone last night ???
He received to type sheets of paper, the £40 charge was for asking the NHS if they could release them, I have seen the two piece's of paper, it would make you weep to know you had been refused like that .
-
Understandably, the NHS has to follow rules regarding access to confidential patient data.
The trouble is that when it comes to doctors giving verbal information, there is no consistency from the medical profession. Consequently, many families are not given accurate information to be able to care for their relatives appropriately.
-
Eilleen,
If the gentleman is over the age of 65, I suggest that you request he gets counselling special to the over 65 age group.
-
aghadowey , thank you for that explanation .
just because archiving give's them the right to see them , and not family .
does not mean that people like Me should not voice my opinion on how I feel about this .
and the son is being allowed to get photocopies if he wishes to do so. ??
has something happened since I spoke to him on the phone last night ???
Your first post said-
...
someone checked and looked at the file's , found them ,requested £40 to release information after checking with NHS,
...
-
Understandably, the NHS has to follow rules regarding access to confidential patient data.
The trouble is that when it comes to doctors giving verbal information, there is no consistency from the medical profession. Consequently, many families are not given accurate information to be able to care for their relatives appropriately.
This thread relates to someone who has been dead since 1979, and it concerns historical records. Not being given accurate information by the medical profession in order to care for relatives is irrelevant to this thread, and it is debatable (preferably elsewhere ::).
Eilleen, If the Archives requested information from the NHS is there anything preventing you from applying directly to the NHS? I don't know if that would be an easier or more difficult route to take.
Am I correct in thinking that the registers for St Johns were deposited at the Archives and no other institution retains copies of these records?
I think you should try again. :)
-
Is this St John's Hospital, Bracebridge Heath? Lincolnshire Archives state that " Medical records and other records of patients are closed for 100 years from the date of the last entry. Permission to view more recent records should be addressed in writing to the Collections Access Team Leader, who will liaise with the relevant authorities."
http://www.lincstothepast.com/Records/RecordDisplaySearchResults.aspx?oid=1400903&mode=c
The records they have are listed at http://www.lincstothepast.com/Records/RecordDisplaySearchResults.aspx?oid=821029&mode=c
Stan
-
Ruskie and Stan , Thank you both for your thoughts ,
I do not believe they have been deposited anywhere else ?
The search at the moment is trying to find elderly :) living relative's from the Gentleman's Mother's
family, with the hope that one of them might have an old photograph of her. :)
but because of the time period and the fact she did not come from the area where she was
incarcerated , and the Gentleman was never given any information about his Mothers family this is
proving quiet a task , I have found some of her siblings and who they married etc, but time is
running out .
once again that you for you help .
-
I found this very interesting , not st Johns , but happening everywhere .
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/mps-win-mental-patients-freedom
-
Thanks for that KGarrad. :)
so regarding dead people , it say's kept for 10 years then destroyed ???
The papers for St John's mental hospital , much come under a different rule,
because He has been told He can see them in 2044 ::)
I have the same problem with my g.uncle. He went into a mental hospital in 1907 and died there in 1964 but despite the Mental Hospital authorities telling me I could have the records, unfortunately, they had been passed to Manchester Archives and they will not let me have them until he has been dead for 100 years, despite that he never married and had no children, so I and any other remaining g.nephews and nieces are his nearest ancestors. I will be 123 in 1864 so I won't get to see the records. I did persuade them to send me his admission sheet (dated 1907) by telling them that one of my sons had had a mental problem and I wanted to see if it was hereditary. My son had an episode of depression, which he got over fairly quickly, thankfully, but at least I wasn't telling a lie when I asked for my g.uncle's admission sheet. It did give a diagnosis (Mania and Delusions) and a photograph of him as a man, looking very like he did on his photograph as a child. I am going to try again, in the hopes that a different archivist 8 years later might have a different view on the matter as it is now over 50 years since my g.uncle died. In any case the rules concerning Data Protection only applies to living persons - Data Protection Act 1998 (amended) and there is no 100 year rule. This was a rule brought in under the auspices of the Public Records Act 1958 and repealed by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 Schedule 8 Part II (Repeals coming into force in accordance with section 87(2)).
Eileen - perhaps you could try writing again quoting the above to them and see if they give way.
-
LizzieW ,
I have had lots of people getting in touch with their terribly sad stories,
like the film show's , the Gentleman who I am trying to help ::) his Mother was admitted in 1944
but by 1959 she could have been released, but as the film say's in no uncertain terms , it was
because other's wanted them put in and kept in.
it does not help that this lady was married to a prominent local family of doctor's,
so hey ho, send her in with post natal depression, then make sure she stay's there .
not going to release those kind of papers, or those kind of papers were destroyed by helpful friends
of the doctor , heck I am ranting again, makes my blood boil :) :)
-
In any case the rules concerning Data Protection only applies to living persons - Data Protection Act 1998 (amended) and there is no 100 year rule. This was a rule brought in under the auspices of the Public Records Act 1958 and repealed by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 Schedule 8 Part II (Repeals coming into force in accordance with section 87(2)).
LizzieW Thank you for the above that is very interesting, will look in to it :)
-
Eileen - My story is not as sad as yours. As far as I know my g.uncle was placed in the mental hospital quite properly, it's only sad that he lived his whole adult life there, when nowadays he would probably have been in the community with medication. My mum said she went with her mum (my g.uncle's sister) to visit him around 1919-1920 when my mum would have been 8 or 9. She said she was really worried beforehand having this image of a "lunatic" which is what they used to be called. In fact she said when they got to the mental hospital, he was in the grounds working as a gardener - his real trade was a butcher - and she said he seemed perfectly normal. I know people with mania and delusions do have normal times, so I guess this must have been one of them. I don't know how long his family visited him for, I always knew I had a g.uncle in a mental asylum. As far as I know, his siblings all died before he did, in 1933, 1949 (my gran), 1953 and one other whose death I can't find (definitely after 1949 as she was at my gran's funeral).
-
Like you Lizzie , I to had a Great uncle who was admitted , this was St Johns, Bracebridge, admitted about 1968 , my Mum and her Aunt use to visit regularly , and the same as you, He was mainly working in the garden's and loved it, He could not come home because all though He was a really gentle man and loved his wife very much, He would have the urge to wack her over the head, on reflection it was maybe some form of dementia.
-
See the National Archive document "Access to NHS records........" http://www.rootschat.com/links/01i8x/
Section 7.5 Medical information relating to identifiable deceased patients
Stan
-
Stan - I've had a look at the link but it's quite confusing - to me at least. Does it now mean that whoever holds the records has to let us have a look at them or get a copy of them after 30 years or not. Or does it depend upon the type of record?
-
LizzieW .
That is a really good link , thank you :)
I must admit it goes above my head ???
still do not understand what We should be able to have access to :)
Eilleen.
-
I'm waiting for Stan to enlighten us ;D ;D
-
Come on Stan :)
Ladies in waiting here :o
Eileen.
-
Ladies still in waiting :)
-
Stan - I've had a look at the link but it's quite confusing - to me at least.
and to me :)
Stan
-
That's OK then :)
I think they are meant to confuse , so that no one challenge's them ;D