RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: iantresman on Wednesday 21 November 18 22:06 GMT (UK)
-
The 1921 census and later, can not be released for 100 years due to acts of Parliament.
On what basis was 100 years chosen? Did most of the population voice this opinion? I wonder what the opinion is now.
-
On what basis was 100 years chosen?
On the basis that the vast majority of people are dead by then.
As death is somewhat unpredictable - the 100yr rule protects the privacy of the majority of people who may still be alive.
-
The 1921 census and later, can not be released for 100 years due to acts of Parliament.
On what basis was 100 years chosen? Did most of the population voice this opinion? I wonder what the opinion is now.
I should mention your first sentence is inaccurate.
There is no statutory 100 year rule for the any census; there was one imposed in 1966 by the Lord Chancellor's Instrument no. 12 of 1966 which was repealed in 2000 by the Freedom of information Act.
However this was debated in an adjournment debate in Parliament in 2004 where the question was put and agreed to.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01n2h/
Having said that Parliament was in fact mislead earlier by being given inaccurate information about the legal position of the release of census information and indeed the Registrar General who made that claim, Arthur Roger Thatcher had to write to Parliament to apologise for exceeding his authority by adding a statement on the 1981 census schedules that it would not be released for 100 years a statement he had no authority to add.
The 1921 and later census come under the 1920 Census Act as amended by the Census (Confidentiality) Act 1991. This prohibits the release of information from the census without limitation.
I would also point out that when the 1911 census was taken most census were released after 50 to 80 years not 100 years. The 1931 England & Wales census was destroyed by fire due to enemy action but the 1931 Scottish census is in the archives waiting to be released.
The statistics from the various census up to 2011 are released after about a year or so but these do not include names so are of little use for genealogy.
The so called 100 year rule is non-statutory, that means it does not have the authority of law (statute).
In other words the present 100 year rule is simply a nice comfortable “office policy” rule unlike the previous 100 year rule that was introduced under a statutory power ( Statutory Instrument No. 12 of 1966).
The 1920 Census Act puts no time limit on the period of non-disclosure of personal information from the census.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/0wkf/
The Census (Confidentiality) Act 1991, which amends the 1920 Census Act, makes it an offence for the Registrar General or any person under his/her control or who supplies services to them to disclose and personal census information.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1991/6/introduction
Again no time limit is placed on the non-disclosure clause.
This in law means no personal information can be released from any census taken under the Census Act, 1920. Having said that there are legal ways round this one of which I attempted to use just after the release of the 1939 National Register but when I asked for support from family historians and from Family History Societies there was no support offered so I stopped my attempt to have the 1921 census released in 2010.
Further Information.
It has been recommended by the Advisory Council on Public Records and Archives that the closure period on census be 80 years.
In my view it is up to the government to set a closure period on census.
If they decide that the closure period should be 100 years then that would be acceptable though I would prefer 80 years.
It is possible that the Statistics Board (though unlikely without pressure) may release later census information early as the legislation they are going to use to open the 1921 census in 2022 allows them to open the 1921 census or any later census today or whenever they choose.
Sorry for such a long post, hope this helps.
Cheers
Guy
-
Thank you Guy for all that, very interesting, and thorough. Since the 1921 censor is expected to be released in digital format on 1 Jan 2022, won't the law be broken so that people gain access before then, in order to carry out the digitisation process?
I would like too see the public give an indication of their preferred duration of withholding the census data; I think the Americans have 70 years.
-
Interesting comments about 1921. Sadly, you'll note that the 1931 census for England and Wales was totally lost in a fire. Also, there was no 1941 census. So 1921 and the 1939 Register are all we will have (for England & Wales) until 1951 census. Scottish 1931 census is fine, and will show up sometime.....
-
It's a shame they cannot release it in the same format as the 1939 register, that is, black out any one who might still be alive.
-
Sorry - Question already answered! Another cup of tea is required.
Regards
Chas
-
Thank you Guy for all that, very interesting, and thorough. Since the 1921 censor is expected to be released in digital format on 1 Jan 2022, won't the law be broken so that people gain access before then, in order to carry out the digitisation process?
I would like too see the public give an indication of their preferred duration of withholding the census data; I think the Americans have 70 years.
Possibly yes, I touched on but failed to mention that the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 (the Act that created the Statistics Board) gives the Statistics Board (now it seems called the Statistics Authority) the power to release any census information whenever they want, that power used to be in the hands of the Registrar General.
However things are not as clear as that as the General Data Protection Regulation, 2018 (GDBR) prevents personal information to be released which includes any information that when used with other information may identify a person.
Cheers
Guy
-
However things are not as clear as that as the General Data Protection Regulation, 2018 (GDBR) prevents personal information to be released which includes any information that when used with other information may identify a person.
Yes, GDPR does prevent the release of ANY personal information without consent. presumably unless countered by an Act of Parliament. GDPR does not apply to people who are deceased.
-
it's a lot less in the USA isn't it?
-
Since the 1921 censor is expected to be released in digital format on 1 Jan 2022, won't the law be broken so that people gain access before then, in order to carry out the digitisation process?
It will be the 2nd Jan 2022 as the 1st is a bank holiday :)
It may well be being transcribed in columns going downwards as the 1939 was,so that people doing it are not privvy to the whole of the census page in one go.They will just be given for example all the names,or all the DOB's etc.
-
It's a shame they cannot release it in the same format as the 1939 register, that is, black out any one who might still be alive.
Yes, GDPR does prevent the release of ANY personal information without consent. presumably unless countered by an Act of Parliament. GDPR does not apply to people who are deceased.
How would "they" know who was alive or dead?
-
Interesting to read that the US 1950 census will become available in 2022, and in particular, the reasons surrounding it. See:
The "72-Year Rule (https://www.census.gov/history/www/genealogy/decennial_census_records/the_72_year_rule_1.html)" (at the U.S. Census Bureau), and in particular the "Letter from Assistant Attorney General Robert G. Dixon, Jr., to General Counsel, General Services Administration, William G. Casselman II, Esg., concerning the origins of the "72-year Rule" and its evolution to 1973" (available here (https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/dixon-6-14-1973.pdf))
-
BUT America is NOT England :-*
-
However things are not as clear as that as the General Data Protection Regulation, 2018 (GDBR) prevents personal information to be released which includes any information that when used with other information may identify a person.
Cheers
Guy
It seems strange that I can look up fairly recent births, marriages and deaths, can make a full family tree for someone I don't even know. It seems wrong to me, but I do it occasionally for DNA purposes.
What harm someone could do with this informatuon if they really wanted to is almost unimaginable (or maybe not).
Regards Margaret
-
It seems strange that I can look up fairly recent births, marriages and deaths, can make a full family tree for someone I don't even know. It seems wrong to me, but I do it occasionally for DNA purposes.
What harm someone could do with this informatuon if they really wanted to is almost unimaginable (or maybe not).
Regards Margaret
Why does that seem strange, the main reason for the keeping of records of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the UK was to allow people to construct family trees (for inheritance purposes), because of this and similar requirements in other Acts of Parliament the following exemptions are made in the Data Protection Act 2018 these also cover the GDPR
Schedule 11
Information required to be disclosed by law etc or in connection with legal proceedings
3 (1) The listed provisions do not apply to personal data consisting of information that the controller is obliged by an enactment to make available to the public, to the extent that the application of the listed provisions would prevent the controller from complying with that obligation.
(2) The listed provisions do not apply to personal data where disclosure of the data is required by an enactment, a rule of law or the order of a court, to the extent that the application of the listed provisions would prevent the controller from making the disclosure.
Disclosing such information cannot do harm because only a complete idiot would use names as part of a password and names includes names of chocolate pets names and indeed since the dawn of home computers any real word. Banks were warned in 1972 that if any account relied on a name as a password they would be liable for any loss from that account if the loss arose from the use of the name.
Birth certificates do not prove identity additional current information is required for that.
Cheers
Guy
-
Hello
I made a further request to the A A I B, for A.M. A.I.B. index information held on Air Crashes, but the second request re 1940 was stopped quoting a EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE number, due to the fact that some of those involved (named) were injured, survived and could possibly be still alive.
European Leglislation
European Leglislation has already overidden part of British Law it seems and were becoming the dictators of our Laws. Unless you can find a British override agreed.
Withheld Census
Regarding the Census the PRO (now TNA) did say that where you can identify a relative was living at a specific address AND are prepared to pay the search fees, they would attempt to find and release that part (no 100% guarantee).
So if you can get something like a Death or Birth Certificate or other Formal document close on the Census date and pay the fee, then you might be lucky.
Mark
-
Just as silly is the so-called 100 year rule that prevents me gaining access to my g.uncle's medical records. He lived in an asylum from 1907 until his death in 1964. The head of the asylum told me I could have a copy of the records but, unfortunately, they were being held by Manchester Archives. The archivist there was adamant that I couldn't see them until 100 years after his death. As I would be 123 by then there is no doubt that I will never see the records. Strangely, other archivists in other record offices seem happy to let people have copies of medical records 50 years after the death of the patient.
After a lengthy correspondence they did agree to let me see his admission page as that was more than 100 years ago and I told them, only small white lie, that one of my sons was suffering mental problems and I wanted to see if whatever my uncle had was hereditary. In fact my son just had depression, for which he was successfully treated, whereas although not spelt out in so many words, I think my g.uncle must have been schizophrenic.
As my uncle was a single man when he went into the asylum and remained so until his death, he has no living ancestors closer than me and my 4th cousins, none of whom is going to be upset by details in his records.
Meanwhile, you can get your father's records from WW2 after his death without much hassle and there could be lots of things in those records which might be troubling. I believe, that my father could actually have sent for his own records if he'd realised they were available to him.
-
Hello
"For hospital records, the record holder is the records manager at the hospital the person attended. Fees may apply for accessing these records." ...
https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/nhs-services-and-treatments/can-i-access-the-medical-records-health-records-of-someone-who-has-died/
The Archivist I believe is wrong to assume the role of Records Manager in refusing you access, provided you have a written letter from the Records Manager at the Institution that looked after your relative authorising you to see your relative's records.
----------
One government Dept tried to refuse access under the DPA to their records relating to my late Son.
However, I had to remind them in writing that the UK DPA (Data Protection Act) no longer applies once a person has died.
Mark
-
Mark
1. I was not executor or administrator of my g.uncle's estate. I have no idea who was as he was the last of his siblings to die and, as far as I know, none of my mum or her siblings had anything to do with him.
2. It was the principal of the hospital who said I could see the notes but, of course, he wasn't there during the time my g.uncle was an inpatient.
3. The archivist was adamant that the 100 year rule applied, despite my writing lengthy letters using phrases and paragraphs that Guy Etchells suggested quoting various rules and regulations.
So when the archivist says No, I have no idea what else I can do. I only really wanted to know how my g.uncle did during his years in the mental hospital. My mum remembered going to see him when she was about 11 with her mum, and being terrified at seeing (in her words) a "madman". Much to her surprise he was gardening in the hospital grounds and she said he seemed quite normal. His trade was actually a butcher, but I guess gardening must have been a safer occupation in the situation he found himself in.
I'm sure today, with the medication we have, my g.uncle would have been able to lead a fruitful life in the community.
-
2. It was the principal of the hospital who said I could see the notes but, of course, he wasn't there during the time my g.uncle was an inpatient.
Hi
Of course the Records Manager will have changed after time, you'll need to deal with the current record holder (this is NOT the Archives) but it would be good to establish who deposited the records in the Archives and then you either ask the Depositor's Records Manager's successor, or the Unit's successors if responsibility was transferred and the responsibility for records was also transferred, for the authority to see the records.
Once the current Records Manager responsible for the Deposited Records has agreed you can see the old notes, ask him/her for a letter you can produce to the Archivist (name) at the (full name of) Archives, saying we are responsible for those records and are authorising Lizzie ..... to see the notes of __________.
Mark
-
Mark
1. I was not executor or administrator of my g.uncle's estate. I have no idea who was as he was the last of his siblings to die and, as far as I know, none of my mum or her siblings had anything to do with him.
2. It was the principal of the hospital who said I could see the notes but, of course, he wasn't there during the time my g.uncle was an inpatient.
3. The archivist was adamant that the 100 year rule applied, despite my writing lengthy letters using phrases and paragraphs that Guy Etchells suggested quoting various rules and regulations.
So when the archivist says No, I have no idea what else I can do. I only really wanted to know how my g.uncle did during his years in the mental hospital. My mum remembered going to see him when she was about 11 with her mum, and being terrified at seeing (in her words) a "madman". Much to her surprise he was gardening in the hospital grounds and she said he seemed quite normal. His trade was actually a butcher, but I guess gardening must have been a safer occupation in the situation he found himself in.
I'm sure today, with the medication we have, my g.uncle would have been able to lead a fruitful life in the community.
The Act that covers access to medical records is the Access to Health Records Act (1990),
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01n3r/
(Be aware you only have 10 years to gain access to G.P. records before they are destroyed).
Only the patent's representative (this would be his/her executor if he/she left a will or his/her Administrator if he/she died intestate) has the right to see the full records.
Cheers
Guy
P.S. Hospitals are frightened of being sued for malpractice which is why they are frightened of revealing patient notes.
This fear is not unfounded as NHS hospitals are a very dangerous place for any person to be treated, as the tabloids have revealed over the years.
Guy
-
P.S. Hospitals are frightened of being sued for malpractice which is why they are frightened of revealing patient notes.
This fear is not unfounded as NHS hospitals are a very dangerous place for any person to be treated, as the tabloids have revealed over the years.
I can understand that, but surely no-one is likely to sue the NHS over the treatment of a mental patient from 1907-1964 (For most of that time there wasn't even an NHS).
I might try again and see if they will send me his notes from 1907 to 1918.
Lizzie