If one party is asking the other party for their medical info what would the appropriate response be? Obviously the requester believes there is something to be "seen" in these medical files.... the individual who owns the medical files does not want to release their medical info. So if they receive a request for information, what is their response?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Request for Information - for medical files
Collapse
X
-
where it might become relevant:
1. imputing income (and one party is stating h/s cannot work due to medical condition then medical corroboration would be requested and likely allowed by judge)
2. medical insurance pre-existing condition to change policy
3. medical reason impairing parent from providing care for children?
Aside from that I can't think of anything else.
Comment
-
Then they can request all they want. Unless they can prove to a judge that they have a valid reason for seeking the information it will likely be flatly denied.
My lawyer requested medical information on my ex to corroborate his claims he was too ill to work (one of his many failed motions) and ex was ordered to produce. He was unable to come up with anything so his motion was dismissed.
You can't just willy-nilly ask for someone's medical records. They are private and often not easily interpreted by a non-medical person. You can't use someone's personal medical files to incriminate them. Most doctor's will not release medical information without a court order anyhow. I believe the same goes for insurance company releasing medical information.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Serene View PostIf one party is asking the other party for their medical info what would the appropriate response be? Obviously the requester believes there is something to be "seen" in these medical files.... the individual who owns the medical files does not want to release their medical info. So if they receive a request for information, what is their response?
Here are the reasons.
1. Medical records are not written for lay people to read or even understand.
2. Judges are not qualified to read these records.
3. Most records are coded and it takes a significant medical expert to provide a view of them.
4. Most medical records are not relevant to matters. If there was something substantial that would impact custody and access the clinician in possession of the record is under a legal obligation to report their concerns to the police or simply FORM their patient.
5. If they want the information then they should really subpoena then they should motion for the medical practitioner to be called to questioning.
Most of this is covered in Policy 4-12 from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario:
Medical Records | Policy | Policies & Publications | College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
As well as Policy 8-05:
Confidentiality of Personal Health Information | Policy | Policies & Publications | College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
The response should be to tell the other party to bring forward a motion and get a court order for the clinician to be questioned. The balance needed to get medical records is REALLY FREAKING HIGH. Note that in the matter often cited on this forum... that litigant has not gotten an order for medical records to be released...
The only way medical records get pulled in is if a Section 30 assessor is (a) qualified to read the records requests them and the parties fail to provide them. I know of NO Section 30 assessors (even ones registered to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario) that are qualified to interpret medical records written by another clinician.
Medical records are crappy evidence if they don't come with the testimony of the actual clinician who wrote them. They are all mostly short hand SOAP notes that are full of complex clinical terminology and measurements.
Doctors don't keep the best notes... Theys see hundreds of patients a week. They maybe write one line at best. Not much to be extracted from medical records usually. Unless you are looking for accurate information about someone's lab work and blood pressure. LOL.
Good Luck!
TaykenLast edited by Tayken; 06-26-2014, 10:47 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by arabian View PostThen they can request all they want. Unless they can prove to a judge that they have a valid reason for seeking the information it will likely be flatly denied.
Originally posted by arabian View PostYou can't just willy-nilly ask for someone's medical records. They are private and often not easily interpreted by a non-medical person. You can't use someone's personal medical files to incriminate them. Most doctor's will not release medical information without a court order anyhow. I believe the same goes for insurance company releasing medical information.
But, the first question on cross will be... Do you have any concerns about your patient's capacity to parent? The answer will be no and if it is "yes" the next question is... Why haven't you brought this to the attention of CAS? (if they haven't already) There is just NO GOOD ANSWER to that second question after a yes if they haven't done so. Basically, it discredits them because they are obligated to do so...
Good Luck!
Tayken
Comment
-
Hey did any of you watch the interview with Michael Jackson's personal physician the other day on TV?
Now that guy is one slippery individual IMO. At times he came across as fairly credible but when the hard, direct questions were asked I thought he was pretty weak.
(Sorry to derail this Serene)
Comment
-
Originally posted by arabian View PostIn Alberta physicians use NetCare which is the database for medical/laboratory testing. While a doctor might have some hand-written or computer notes on a patient, NetCare laboratory records are "part 2" of a patient's medical profile.
Comment
Comment