- NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
- shows RTI
- RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
- 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
- The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
- Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
- Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'patient'.
Found 7 results
Dear All, The undersigned has been raising the issue of disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 about patients belonging to EWS Category getting the mandated subsidized treatment from Medanta, Artemis & Fortis Hospitals since 2010. The Hon'ble State Information Commission, Haryana while disposing undersigned Complaints under RTI Act 2005 ordered that information regarding subsidized information being given by these Hospitals be provided on its web-site as well as HUDA (the Govt. Institution which gave land to these Hospitals on institutional rates) but the compliance of Hon'ble State Information Commission by these Hospitals have been dismal. This has been going on for last five years. Fed up with non compliance of Hon'ble State Information Commission, Haryana, my dear friend and fellow RTI Activist Mr Aseem Takyar filed PIL in Punjab & Haryana High Court seeking directions of implementation of Hon'ble SIC order, the Hon'ble double bench of High Court issued notices to Haryana Government & Medanta, Artemis & Fortis Hospitals. Sensing the importance and urgency of the matter, a short date of 28th July 2015 has been given by Hon'ble HC. Kindly enclosed herewith find the news clippings appearing in Hindustan Times English, Hindustan Hindi both dated 17th July 2015. Thanks for your time, Harinder Dhingra RTI & Human Rights Activist CWP_14055_2015_16_07_2015_INTERIM_ORDER.pdf
rtiindia posted a topic in RTI Appeals decisionsThis article has been posted at our #LawSegment . To read the full article follow this link: Private Hospitals to give records of Patient on day-to-day basis and to subscribe to our daily mailer follow this link Join our free Right to Information Newsletter. Central Information Commission had recommended to force*Private Hospitals to give records of Patient on day-to-day basis*because this daily disclosure will prevent undesirable practices of altering records after damage caused to patient. Forcing the private hospitals to provide daily*wise medical records…Read more › The law segment is available here RTI INDIA - Invoking Your Rights Read the complete article here...
akhilesh yadav posted a topic in RTI in MediaCHENNAI: Most government hospitals in the city have fewer ventilators than sanctioned or necessary. Several ventilators are unused as they've not been maintained, as per data obtained through an RTI application by TOI. In Government Stanley Medical College Hospital, 22 of the 50 ventilators are not working. In Government General Hospital, 19 ventilators are not working. Government Royapettah Hospital and Government Kasturba Gandhi Hospital have only 13 ventilators each. Government Kilpauk Hospital did not reply to the RTI application. A ventilator is a life-saving equipment that helps a patient breathe. A hospital requires ventilators in its intensive care unit (ICU), intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU), TB ward, neonatal ICU and casualty ward. Chennai's government hospitals get about 150 critically ill patients every day, not just from the city but also from districts. Read more: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Gasp-Ventilators-conk-off-at-government-hospitals/articleshow/36015815.cms
Medical regulations and RTI Act as reported in the Hindu by Staff Reporter Jun 03, 2010 Bangalore: Indian law recognises that medical privilege is available to the doctor and the patient except in the most unusual circumstances, where public interest demands disclosure, said R. Venkat Rao, Vice-Chancellor, National Law School of India University. Delivering a lecture on “Recent advances in medical law, old wine in a new bottle?” on the occasion of the Foundation Day of the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences in Bangalore on Tuesday, he said the Indian judiciary has crafted the principles of medical law with care, borrowing from common law where appropriate and modifying it to suit Indian circumstances. Prof. Rao pointed out that the courts have observed that in a doctor-patient relationship, the most important aspect is the doctor's duty of maintaining secrecy. The doctor cannot disclose to a person any information regarding his patient, which he has gathered during the course of treatment. He also cannot disclose to anyone else the mode of treatment or the advice given by him to the patient. Confidentiality The confidentiality required to be maintained of the medical records of a patient, including a convict, considering the regulations framed by the Medical Council of India cannot override the provisions of the Right to Information Act. “If there be inconsistency between the regulations and the RTI Act, the provisions of the Act will prevail and the information will have to be made available under the Act, he said. About pain Delivering a lecture on “Is there a meaning for suffering?” Thimmappa Hegde, Director and Senior Consultant Neurosurgeon, Narayana Hrudayalaya, said “pain and suffering are not the same. Pain is something one will have to endure but suffering is completely voluntary”. The Hindu : Karnataka / Bangalore News : Medical regulations and RTI Act
City docs may need 2nd opinion for all surgeries as reported by Pushpa Narayan,TNN 11 Oct 2008 CHENNAI: Soon doctors in Chennai will have to seek a second opinion every time they decide to put the patient under the scalpel. In a bid to monitor and regulate healthcare, Chennai Corporation will dispatch letters to all hospitals by mid-October making it mandatory for them to seek external opinion before operating on a patient as well as videograph all surgeries and submit records in case of a patient's death. "It will be made mandatory from November this year. We will strengthen our reporting system further. We will also insist on an autopsy if we are not convinced with the reason for death given by the hospital," said Chennai Corporation chief health officer Dr P Kuganantham. "The death audit system will make the online issuing of death certificates more efficient. Nearly 120 deaths are registered in the city daily. Most of the time, we find it difficult to comprehend the reasons for death. We will now seek specific reasons such as infections and botched-up surgeries. Our death audit will give us all this information," he said. About 500 hospitals - government and private - are registered with Chennai Corporation for online entry of births and deaths. The department wants to make it mandatory for hospitals to videograph all surgical procedures and make them available under the Right to Information Act. The idea was mooted after a study by the civic body found several hospitals lacked qualified anaesthetists and trained nurses. Space and ventilation and sanitation facilities were also found to be below standards. Responses to the proposed supervision have been varied. Some like Dr T N Ravishankar, honorary secretary, Indian Medical Association, rejected it. "A surgeon would not want his opinion to be doubted. And what if the patient does not want a second opinion? If patients object to the procedure being videographed, should we force them? Who is going to bear the cost?" he said. Others like orthopaedic surgeon and Indian Journal Of Medical Ethics editor Dr George Thomas agreed with the authorities on some of the proposals. City docs may need 2nd opinion for all surgeries-Chennai-Cities-The Times of India
Right to information and patients' secrets as reported by Dr C Jayan | 01 Oct 2008 in Express Buzz Recently, under some strange quirk of fate, the writer had to assume charge as Public Information Officer of Medical College Hospital, Trivandrum. This has been a totally unexpected betrothal on me who at times had dreamt about becoming a pilot, an astronaut, an engine driver, a candy-man and a surgeon. But this is something that comes free with the headship of a public office nowadays in India and government hospitals are no exception. The basis of what follows is the experience gained while judging the thin line that separates the domains of confidentiality of personal medical data and the right of a citizen to know about the activities of a public authority. It is in some ways poetic justice that the Right to Information Act should finally come into being in India which has one of the oldest known organised methods of sequestrating knowledge to select sections of the society. The practice of not allowing 'sudras' & 'vaisyas' to learn Veda is proof enough that we knew information is power right from the beginnings of our civilisation! The first attempt to allow free access to information held in government custody came in the form of the Freedom of Information Act in 2002. RTI Act 2005 is a further refinement of this Act. The preamble of the RTI Act acknowledges the existence of conflicting interests of need for secrecy and an informed citizenry for the proper functioning of democracy. It aims to harmonise these conflicting interests while preserving the paramountcy of democracy. It is meant to contain corruption and to hold the government accountable for the governed. A law can only be as good as the society which uses it. RTI Act, meant for 'promoting transparency and accountability in the working of public authority' is most commonly used in our hospital for obtaining case sheets, wound certificates and postmortem reports by advocates to expedite settlement of their cases in MACT. In their eagerness to settle cases they perhaps forget the fact that information gathered while practising medicine is considered sacred and doctors are sworn to protect it. The Medical Council of India stipulates that a registered medical practitioner shall not disclose the secrets of a patient that have been learnt in the exercise of his profession except in a court of law under orders of the presiding judge. This assurance of secrecy is an essential prerequisite for seamless doctor-patient relationship and the facts revealed when there is such confidence may even contribute to correct diagnosis. Violation of code of medical ethics can risk erasure of the name of the practitioner from the register. It is also not entirely unimaginable that one of these days someone will request the case sheets of his neighbour with whom he has a score to settle. If it states that he is HIV positive and if this fellow takes the photocopy and circulates it in the community leading to the suicide of this person, who will be responsible? The fear of discrimination and ostracism on revelation of disease status prevails to different degree in different cultures, for different diseases and at different periods in history. There are other situations in which a patient may desire absolute secrecy, sometimes even from the spouse. Once I had a patient who preferred marrying off his daughter to chemotherapy for himself. This intelligent man understood that the best deal he could get from chemotherapy is perhaps 6 more months but the cost of it would wreck the plans of marriage. He feared that if the relatives knew this they would compel him to have chemotherapy and wanted to retain his dignity by making correct decision for his family in those last months of his life. I complied with his request of not disclosing his disease to his family for which even one day of extension of his life was more desirable. Imagine if one of his relative files an application under RTI Act?! Doctor's consultation rooms abound with hundreds of such instances. On the other hand there are instances when public access to the medical records is desirable. Before arranging a marriage, if the medical records are accessible to the prospective life partner marriage with an HIV positive person can be prevented. The grounds for rejection of an application for the medical records of a third person need to be stated just as explicitly as in the case of Jammu & Kashmir. Provisions should be built into the Act which will discourage citizens from using this boon for ensuring accountability of government just as a shortcut to expedite personal pursuits which are of no public interest whatsoever. The writer is Deputy Superintendent, Medical College Hospital, Trivandrum. http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?artid=joUgQjSWVMw=&Title=Right+to+information+and+patients%E2%80%99+secrets&SectionID=XVSZ2Fy6Gzo=&MainSectionID=XVSZ2Fy6Gzo=&SectionName=m3GntEw72ik=