DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Disciplinary panel can proceed against doctor who discussed patient’s details on train, say judges

Posted on January 30, 2013 by Dissent

The current issue of the British Medical Journal has an article by Clare Dyer on disciplinary proceedings involving a psychiatrist who discussed a patient’s case on a crowded train.

The NHS trust that runs Broadmoor secure hospital can go ahead with disciplinary action against a consultant forensic psychiatrist who discussed a patient’s medical report with a colleague on a crowded train, three Court of Appeal judges have ruled.

The judges quashed a High Court injunction stopping West London Mental Health NHS Trust from convening a disciplinary panel to hear allegations of breach of confidence against Dr. Chhabra.

Judge Jeremy McMullen granted the injunction in the High Court last June after ruling that it would be a breach of Chhabra’s contract to allow the disciplinary panel to be convened.

The case investigator appointed by the trust had accepted Chhabra’s explanation that she had not appreciated that her actions, which also included dictating two patient reports on the train, had breached patient confidentiality.

[…]

The appeal judges heard that the main allegation was that Chhabra had the patient’s report on her lap and was discussing it with a colleague when the two doctors were passengers on a train from Sunningdale in Berkshire to Waterloo in London in November 2010.

Opposite them happened to be sitting the head of secure services policy at the Department of Health, Jo Leech.

Chhabra admitted reading the patient’s notes on the train but said that she had not realised that his name could be seen.

After a secretary expressed concern about train noises on a dictation tape, she also admitted dictating two reports on the train in one week when she had felt pressured by work, but she said that she believed she had ensured no other passengers were close by.

Read more on BMJ  (subscription required)

Personally, I have a tough time believing that the psychiatrist did not appreciate that her actions were a breach of confidentiality. Mental health professionals are generally especially attuned to the need to protect confidentiality. Discussing cases on a train or dictating reports on a train strikes me as even worse than the scenario where healthcare professionals discuss cases in a hospital elevator. It also creates a terrible impression for the public who may fear that at some point, their own conditions or cases might be discussed in public spaces.

via Dr. Ken Pope

Edited August 4, 2014 to remove Dr. Chhabra’s first name from post, consistent with what the original source has done in response to a request concerning the doctor’s personal safety.

Update: This case ultimately went to the UK’s Supreme Court, who ordered the Trust not to pursue any of the confidentiality concerns contained in the Trust’s letter of 12 August 2011 as matters of gross misconduct; and not to pursue any confidentiality concerns without first re-starting and completing an investigation under its policy D4A.

Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← NZ: 543 ACC privacy breaches since last year
Docs 'n guns, Part 2: Psychiatrists, mental health advocates uneasy with gun policy prescriptions →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • WestJet investigates cyberattack disrupting internal systems
  • Plastic surgeons often store nude photos of patients with their identity information. When would we call that “negligent?”
  • India: Servers of two city hospitals hacked; police register FIR
  • Ph: Coop Hospital confirms probe into reported cyberattack
  • Slapped wrists for Financial Conduct Authority staff who emailed work data home
  • School Districts Unaware BoardDocs Software Published Their Private Files
  • A guilty plea in the PowerSchool case still leaves unanswered questions
  • Brussels Parliament hit by cyber-attack
  • Sweden under cyberattack: Prime minister sounds the alarm
  • Former CIA Analyst Sentenced to Over Three Years in Prison for Unlawfully Transmitting Top Secret National Defense Information

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?
  • New York passes a bill to prevent AI-fueled disasters
  • Synthetic Data and the Illusion of Privacy: Legal Risks of Using De-Identified AI Training Sets
  • States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe
  • AI tools collect and store data about you from all your devices – here’s how to be aware of what you’re revealing
  • 23andMe Privacy Ombudsman Urges User Consent Pre-Data Sale

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.