| HomeAbout UsOur ResultsFeesFAQsOur TeamGalleryDirectionsUseful LinksContact UsMedia |
|
|
|
| The Right of Access to Patient Records and Related Reports |
|
Traditionally dctors and hospitals have adopted a secretive and arrogant approach regaridng patients rights to receive copies of records relating to the patient.  Some years ago in line with the Bill of Rights Government enacted - the Promotion of the Right of Access to Information Act, so as to enable citizens to obtain copies of records and documents relating to themselves.  Unfortunately the Supreme Court of Appeal has adopted a narrow view of the rights available to patients or their dependents to obtain patients records and related reports.  In the case of UNITAS HOSPITAL v VAN WYK AND ANOTHER – 2006 (4) SA 436 - It was common knowledge that there were nursing problems in the intensive care and high care units of the hospital at the time and a Dr Naude, the Director of the Intensive care Unit and the Chairman of the Body representing the medical specialists, practicing at Unitas had prepared a Report on General Nursing Conditions in the ICU and High Care Units at Unitas Hospital.  Not surprisingly, Unitas Hospital was less than keen to make this Report available to the Plaintiff and vigirously contested the plaintiffs efforts to obtain a copy thereof. It was also admittted that the deceased had inhaled vomit into his lungs in the Intensive Care Unit after surgery, suffered brain damage as a result and died a month later.  The lack of appropriate nursing care could have resulted in that occurrence and evidence as to incompetent, unskilled or poorly trained Nurses in the Hospital ICU Unit may well have been relevant to the plaintiff’s death.  Deputy Judge President Mojapelo appropriately held in the Johannesburg High Court that Mrs Van Wyk be provided with a copy of Dr Naude’s Report, One can only but agree with the learned Judge’s reasoning.   On appeal the majority judges who heard the case in the Appeal Court came to a different conclusion and refused to make available the records or the report. Judge Cameron disagreed with his fellow judges in that case and in supporting Judge Mojapelo's decision in the High Court stated:  “I respectfully differ from my Colleague’s approach. Like him, I do not consider that PAIA offers untrammeled pre-action disclosure. But I do think that this is what Mojapelo J had in mind, or what his order in favour of Mrs Van Wyk portended. In particular, I disagree distinctly with my Colleague’s apparent suggestion that Mojaelo J’s approach, or recognizing Mrs Van Wyk’s claim, would be to licence fishing expeditions. In my view, Mrs Van Wyk has established a clear and substantial connection between her claim against the hospital and the contents of the report she seeks to see.† If you are a victim of medical negligence or would like to get Ronald Bobroff & Partners Inc to assist you with a medical negligence claim please contact us or call us on 011 880-6781 or on our 24hour toll free number 0860 100 184.  |
* Terms and Conditions apply.