recording should never be forced on patients or families, nor should having their own records, nor own health budgets nor having to access care digitally,. It should be a choice not an imposition. However, the quid pro quo is that the clinical notes ARE the record
-
-
Replying to @mancunianmedic @MsPottingShed and
‘Either we make an audio recording of your sensitive consultation, or we write a partisan, defensive account of the interaction’. Neither addresses the epistemic/power imbalance that affect care records
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @MadeInBedlam @mancunianmedic and
Well, to be fair, that works both ways. What's to stop me, as a patient, making up stuff about what went on in a consultation, and telling it to an "ambulance chasing" lawyer? I wouldn't, of course, but some might.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MsPottingShed @mancunianmedic and
Nothing (well apart from being labelled as a malicious complainant etc in your notes). And as observed above, untrue allegations by patients at treated as allegations, and staff are presumed innocent. Untrue allegations by staff are presumed fact. Hence the power imbalance
2 replies 2 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @MadeInBedlam @mancunianmedic and
Then I guess the suggestion of audio recording (with consent of both parties) of consultations probably makes sense.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MsPottingShed @MadeInBedlam and
Consent of both parties is ideal and imho, preferred. But only the patient's consent is strictly necessary.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @C7RKY @MsPottingShed and
covert recording is never acceptable, nor is the use of recording where one party can edit it for their own ends without the other having a tape of their own to guard against this
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mancunianmedic @C7RKY and
Legally it is ‘acceptable’ - whether you like it or not. And as things stand staff covertly record SUs as routine. I - nor none of the people I know in MH services - were made aware of what is recorded about us unless we became ‘challenging’ about it.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MadeInBedlam @mancunianmedic and
That, I find genuinely troubling. It would be bad enough to record someone without consent. But to then attempt to label that person as 'challenging' - with all the inference that brings - when they have every right to be doing so, smacks of a second abuse of power to me.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @C7RKY @MadeInBedlam and
Not only challenging John police labelled me noted in my DPA vociferous
.. I didn't mind, I took it as a complement.. hoping they would be fighting alleged murder if it were their parent.. umm!2 replies 2 retweets 2 likes
Vociferous eh? That's a new one. The big 3 are usually mad, bad or vexatious. Abusive & vexatious are the only 2 reasons which the NHS Constitution outlined, which would permit withholding services (refusing to answer questions incl). Declare you 'mad' if all else fails.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.