This appeared about the middle of the week after the first part of hearings for last week in the myHR by the Senate.
Tuesday, 18 September 2018 / Published in MEDIA, NATIONAL MEDIA
Nearly One Million Australians Opt Out Of My Health Record
NEARLY ONE MILLION AUSTRALIANS OPT OUT OF MY HEALTH RECORD
Nearly one million Australians have opted out of the My Health Record following the Government’s botched rollout – proving public trust in this important reform has been severely damaged.
Under Labor questioning in a Senate Committee, the Australian Digital Health Agency has finally admitted that 900,000 people have now opted out. This is the first update provided since 20,000 people opted out on day one.
With two months to go in the opt-out period, that number is likely to rise to well over one million people.
It’s clear now just how badly the Government’s rollout has undermined public support for a system that could deliver enormous benefits.
The Government must now heed Labor’s call to suspend the opt-out rollout until all remaining security and privacy concerns are addressed and public confidence in this important reform is restored.
Labor supports a national digital health record – which is why we created one when we were last in Government.
But the Government’s failure to explain its shift from an opt-in model to an opt-out model has fuelled suspicion and scepticism.
The ADHA also said while public awareness of the program is high, nearly half (41 per cent) still don’t know a record will be created for them at the end of the opt-out period.
This shows the Government still has considerable work to do to educate and inform the public. It should begin by delivering on its promise to launch a new comprehensive information campaign.
The Labor-initiated My Health Record inquiry, which Health Minister Greg Hunt described as a “stunt”, has also uncovered a range of other concerns that the Government must address.
TUESDAY, 18 SEPTEMBER 2018
Here is the link:
This release was preceded by this broadside:
Health record data leak inevitable: Labor
Labor says it is ”foolish” for the government to think data leaks won't occur in its e-health record system and the government needs to be ready when it does.Rebecca Gredley
Australian Associated Press September 17, 2018 8:57pm
Labor has warned Australians' health records will inevitably leak through a controversial online system, urging the government to go further in protecting data.Opposition health spokeswoman Catherine King said her party would not oppose legislation to strengthen the e-health records system from passing the lower house.
But she flagged a Senate debate once an inquiry into the system had been completed.
"It is foolish of any government to say this data won't leak at some point. What are the protections for people when that actually occurs?" Ms King told parliament on Monday.
Police and government agencies will need a court order to obtain patient data from the My Health Record system under the bill.
The draft laws also ensure data from a patient who opts out of the system will be deleted.
More here:
https://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/health-record-data-leak-inevitable-labor/news-story/e126e4c77da0b3fd7362442906c94996
This was followed up by some pretty spirited and, frankly, quite hostile, questioning by Senator Singh (Labor, Tasmania) in the apparently supplementary and hastily arranged hearing on Thursday.
Senator Singh not only asked about the ADHA supervisory arrangements, care.data, its progress and about payments to clinical professionals but also ventilated a range of questions about the behavior of the CEO in his dealings with journalists. All in all she had been very well briefed by someone!
This exchange is of particular note:
“Senator SINGH: Mr Kelsey, in July you penned a long letter criticising the reporting of News Corp's Sue Dunlevy. That letter was published on the ADHA website but was later taken down. Why was that?
Mr Kelsey: Ms Dunlevy reported inaccurately a number of issues in relation to the My Health record. One of the responsibilities that the agency has and has had during this process is to ensure that people are informed accurately of the way in which the My Health record functions. We have been in touch with News Corp over the previous couple of years and have had a series of corrections published in relation to articles that have been published by Ms Dunlevy. On this occasion we published the facts in relation to the article she published on I think 14 July. We then had a letter from News Corp raising—
Senator SINGH: Yes, I know all that. I'm asking why you took it off the website.
Mr Kelsey: In response to the letter from News Corp, we then in good faith took down the statement that we had put up there. We then sought legal advice and subsequently wrote to News Corp to clarify that the statement was accurate and that we have subsequently built the points that were in that statement into other parts of the frequently asked questions part of our website.
Senator SINGH: Have you sought any other journalist change or removed any critical coverage, directly or indirectly?
Mr Kelsey: No. We welcome the debate that has been going on in Australia. We think it's incredibly important.
Senator SINGH: So that was no?
Mr Kelsey: We have been active in ensuring that, where misunderstandings or inaccurate reporting has taken place—and that's not about trying to diminish the dialogue—
Senator SINGH: So you have then?
Mr Kelsey: We have been in touch with journalists where things have been misunderstood.
Senator SINGH: Can you provide some examples? What were those factual objections to the reporting?
Mr Kelsey: Yes. I'm very happy to take that on notice, if that is all right. I can't immediately give you that, but we can certainly provide you on notice with examples where we have sought correction of misunderstandings or inaccuracies in reporter coverage.”
It is clear Senator Singh has some pretty good sources in and around the ADHA and journalists to come up with these very specific questions.
I know personally of a range of other actual, not rumoured, cases of less than empathetic dealings with journalists by the ADHA both here and overseas and I have also read the NewsCorp letter – which I can assure you, you would not want to be the recipient of.
The ADHA (and NEHTA before them) have always employed a large number of communications professionals (known to you and me as spinners) and what they see as errors are often reports that do not have quite the positive message or the enthusiastic positivity the ADHA is looking for!
All this makes me wonder just how hard the Labor Party is going to be on the ADHA, and Mr Kelsey, in the Senate Report due on October 8, and how likely major change at the ADHA is after the Labor Government is elected. It really seems Labor is seriously on the case to avoid blame if the myHR becomes theirs in a few months, and turns out to be a political nightmare.
I can assure you that an outcome of major change can’t come soon enough for some in and around the Digital Health ecosystem.
What do you think?
David.
15 comments:
They ( labour) should also look into the networks within the ADHA. We hear many stories of bullying and the like. We also have two very senior woman resign. Why is that Tim? I have read one LinkedIn posting that did not put the ADHA in a cultural paradise the ADHA CEO likes to paint to the board. In fact those few at ADHA I do know have rather different views.
Throw the cancer screening project with Telstra in the mix and things do not look good for DoH.
8:19 AM. The Telstra/DoH cancer screening project. That is a very real lesson to be learned, especially when it comes to ‘replatforming’ the MyHR. The rushed into bed the registry work with no design concepts and a she’ll be right attitude, claiming lives are being lost and benefits galore.
Is Kelsey allowed to make allegations against Sue Dunlevy to a parliamentary inquiry - thus recorded in Hansard - and presumably against other journalists in answers to questions on notice without them receiving a right of reply? Whether the ADHA liked it or not, and confronted with many dollars worth of spin, the media coverage of a consequential government health project is not only democracy at work but has actually unearthed some concerns about My Health Record that can now happily be fixed.
?? "fixed" ?? Such a superficial simplistic naive view. It needs to be terminated, nothing less.
David,
I wouldn't be too gleeful about labor's possible actions re the MyHR if they achieve office sometime in the future.
The statement sounds too much like a standard pre-election blaming exercise, centred on opt-out, rather than acknowledging any fundamental flaw in the MyHR's design and possible value.
Asserting support for their original plan for an electronic health record, without promising a fundamental re-think or a proper evaluation, seems very shallow indeed.
The British government was much more professional in cancelling Kelsey's earlier effort.
Anonymous at September 24, 2018 2:29 PM said:
?? "fixed" ?? Such a superficial simplistic naive view.
I think you missed the irony ;)
Military grade irony is never easy to get, unless you obtain a service persons identity through MHR@darkwebsales.con
@ Sept 24 9:51. Is Tim Kelsey allowed to make allegations against Sue Dunlevy?? I think Tim views himself as the Justin Milne of Digital Health.
The Justin Milne of digital health indeed. Remember the public statement about Sue Dunlevy placed on the ADHA's website (which it had to take down)? Is an Australian government publication - which is what digitalhealth.gov.au professes to be - allowed to be used to criticise and attempt to discredit an Australian individual? It seems extraordinary to me. And Sue is not the only journalist to have incurred interference and unfair criticism, which should be a scandal.
Having just resigned from the ADHA. The lack of a CEO was evident and those Tim Kelsey appointed are hardly the caliber required to run the ADHA. Tim might make a marketing manager (although I question that) he is certainly no CEO and definitely not a half million a year CEO. The ADHA is a shambles, those who work hard to make it operate are hamstrung because the role and function of a CEO is non-existent. The pain some had to go through to fix the obvious was disheartening to witness.
To succeed the board needs to replace the EGM AND 60% of the General Managers. They also would do well to investergate the widespread conflicts of interest
"To succeed..."? At what? They have no idea what needs to be done and cannot even do what they think needs to be done.
Progress in transforming healthcare will come from outside government and the ADHA.
Even if they survive the catastrophe they have created for themselves, it's the wrong solution to the wrong problem. Re-platforming a broken solution won't succeed because they will still be trying to solve the same old problem.
In the USA, they are looking to use scribes because getting GPs to do administrative tasks is seen as counter productive:
https://www.emrandehr.com/2018/09/26/a-vote-in-favor-of-using-scribes/
Dumb implementation of technology is reducing efficiency and effectiveness.
Introducing a third person into the consultation process (i.e. someone who will listen in on private conversations between GP and patient and add costs to the whole process) is not exactly transforming healthcare, it's adding more dead weight.
If the government and the public service are to learn any sort of lessons from this debacle, I think they should be made to carry on for as long as possible watching their pie in the sky plans fester and die.
The last thing health care needs is for those who have participated in this mess to leap off to other gigs and make the same mistakes over and over again. It is our duty to tie the present incumbents to their chairs and watch them suffer, as the real progress is made around them.
Having observed the ADHA. I think succeeding in anything would be a win. I wonder sometimes if the CEO could run a bath
Well to be fair they have succeeded in reminding everyone the critically important role the fax plays as an information tool for healthcare and needs to be carefully managed to protect communications between a patients providers
@11:53 AM. Indeed. Not a very real component to be trivialise or dismissed in the way it is currently being put. Many many lives would be put at risk.
Post a Comment