Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/04/12 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Quite so, Andy. On both side of the Atlantic, there seems to be a 'shortlist' of wholly erroneous, indeed pathetic, excuses which medics of limited knowledge, little reflection and even less candour make silly little whines about when they realise a patient insists on taking a recording, and the 'intrusive' excuse is just about the silliest. It is only intrusive if the patient finds it intrusive. And a patient's recording should never intrude on another patient's consultation. If that were the case that would mean that the clinicians were arranging consultations such that other patients could overhear them, and that would be an infringement of the overheard patient's rights of privacy\confidentiality by the medics. Conversely, there is nothing which a clinician can say or do to a patient behind closed doors, which a patient isn't entitled to 'shout from the rooftops' if he or she wants to so, thereby 'waiving' the right to confidentiality to the extent of the rooftop announcement. The doctor should have nothing to hide. Their principal real fears are, of course, firstly that their lack clinical competence (under which heading I include the rudeness and arrogance of all too many of them) will be evidenced in patients' hands; and secondly, the ability to make inaccurate records about what has happened is severely curtailed i.e. lying about recording patients becomes very much more difficult. I have a couple of instance of these arguments at work, this Bank holiday W\E. The first is another USA doctor, this time writing purportedly to advise other doctors what to do about patients recording 'office visits' (= 'doctors appointments' over here). Frankly, 'what a twit.' He does the 'confidentiality' claptrap, and then, bold as brass, gets to the real point: " Recording a medical discussion via video or audio … puts you and your office at significant risk." Oh does it now, David Troxel, MD? Apart from the exposure of medical negligence\malpractice, what risk would that be? Here's the link: http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2011/08/patients-allowed-record-office-visit.html And incidentally in the majority American states it is expressly NOT illegal to record covertly. The other example, is one I have mentioned before, and it relates to Freedom of Information requests, the DWP and Atos. Back in 2010, a requester challenged the DWP to find grounds on which they could declare the taking of a covert recording of an Atos benefits medical illegal. The DWP failed because it is not illegal, of course, - but they came up with a version of the confidentiality\intrusion excuse! A recording claimant might record another claimant's confidential 'information', they said, which wouldn't be 'acceptable'. Now, as you may well know, the rules are supposed to have changed last year – a claimant is now supposed to be able to require Atos to take (and provide a copy of) a recording of any work capability assessment. So co-conspirator Jim O asked them earlier this year whether it would be 'acceptable' to the DWP that Atos should arrange benefits medicals such that they could be overheard, or indeed be recorded, by a claimant in another session. Oh no, of course not! - came the eventual but emphatic reply, that should indeed not happen. So the intrusion\confidentiality excuse evaporates into the thin air of ignorance whence it came. See:- http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/personal_and_confidential_inform#comment-26989
  2. 1 point
    The signs do not contradict each other they compliment each other, you cannot park between 8am and 6pm which is indicated by the yellow line/sign although you can stop to load/unload EXCEPT between the hours shown on the white sign which prohibit loading, these are basic signs shown in the highway code. Since the yellow sign has no days shown on it it indicates the restriction is anyday, yellow lines are painted for traffic management the the same as any other sign, you would not expect to be allowed to speed, ignore give way signs, no right turn signs etc just because its Easter why should yellow lines be any different?
  3. 1 point
    Not true as we have just proved on MSE by helping a lady sell her house (with a Restriction) after her buyers Solicitor "refused to budge" without the undertaking you talk of. Her property is now sold and whilst, in this instance, the creditor did obtain some money from the debtor the the point was made that a Form K restriction only has power of notification and the Solicitor had to accept to the buyers request to proceed with the sale on understanding the Restriction would fall away after the sale was made. So the "reality" of what can be done, legally, needs to be understood by sellers with a Restriction to allow them the choice they have.
×
×
  • Create New...