Family Fallout. Advice required

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

The rules are that curiosity, nosiness, worry or any variation upon are absolutely no excuse for accessing medical records that you do not need to see specifically for the purpose of doing your job. So any fallout from that is 100% the fault of the person doing the 'investigation' and I have no sympathy whatsoever.

When I've worked for the NHS, this and the consequences of doing so, is made clear on numerous occasions. You're also told that if, in the course of doing your job, you have to access friends' or relatives' data, not only do you never breathe a word of it to anybody because it's equally prohibited, you go to your line manager and explain, and they will advise you or make it possible for somebody else to take that task over. I'd certainly ask to be excused from anything relating to the DDs or the OH; it's not information I'd want to have.

Work is work; home is home. If you can't separate the two, you're in the wrong job. They are two different things and, no matter how miffed the mother or the friend is, it's solely the Mum's fault she's now up DooDoo Creek and he had every right to submit a complaint.

Spirit_2

It is quite normal when dealing with a patient complaint, to tell the accused what is being complained about and by whom. If Betty has accessed inappropriately it is gross misconduct. Patients and public have a right to expect their data to be hadled sensitively and confidentialy. Betty cannot help herself to information to satisfy a personal interest.

It is highly unlikely that Betty would lose her pension. That penalty is more likely where there has been significant financial gain to the staff member through fraud and the NHS seeks recovery.

Betty is in the wrong here, no one else. My advice is that your friend should reinforce the message that Betty's actions are wrong. support her mum to be truthful and face the consequences. Fabricating a reason for unauthorised access will only prolong proceedings and drive the manger to a dismissal decision with no possibility of a lesser penalty.

Pollycat

Mojisola wrote: »

I find it hard to believe that her manager would tell her who had complained - if the management is that useless, it's no wonder Betty thought she could get away with snooping!

^^^^ this

LilElvis wrote: »

Then "Mick" should lodge a complaint against "Betty's" manager.

^^^^ And this (if any of it is true)

FBaby

I don't get what this thread has evolved to the in and out of NHS patient confidentiality policies! In any case, I expect that Better knew who this was concerning the moment she was told a complaint was made, her boss wouldn't have had to tell her!

Back to the thread and how all this affects Fran. Well, if I were to put myself in her shoes, I would be angry with my mum for checking my boyfriend out. Whether it is against the rules etc..., I wouldn't really care. I would be angry though that she'd been so stupid that it now affected all her life. I probably would feel a bit guilty that if it wasn't for my choice of boyfriend, it probably wouldn't have happened though.

I would also be angry with my boyfriend for having made the choice to report my mum without talking to me first. I would be upset that he would have done it without consider the consequences, which inevitably, would impact on me and my child to come.

This however would depend on how it came about. Was there a huge argument, mum maybe saying something nasty to boyfriend, boyfriend retaliating?

We can't say what Fran should do as only she knows all the background and implications of her actions. She needs to do what is best for her and her child to be.

Mojisola

PurpleGoldFish86 wrote: »

In all honesty, Betty probably did loom at medical files, she just seems to nosey for her own good

FBaby wrote: »

In any case, I expect that Better knew who this was concerning the moment she was told a complaint was made, her boss wouldn't have had to tell her!

That depends on how many people's records she's snooped on!

GracieP

Betty's manager may not have told her who made the complaint. If Mick's were the only records that she had accessed without due cause and she was then told she is being investigated for accessing people's records, she would automatically know who reported her. In order to try and confirm for sure what she has good reason to assume, she may then have called her daughter and told her that her manager gave her Mick's name. She may have also been trying to see if her daughter knew that Mick had made the complaint.

It's not really a stretch to imagine that someone who underhandedly accesses people's personal files would also tell lies when caught out.

fierystormcloud

PurpleGoldFish86 wrote: »

Management have told her it was him, that's why she called Fran to her last night. They'd given her his full name

GracieP wrote: »

Betty's manager may not have told her who made the complaint. If Mick's were the only records that she had accessed without due cause and she was then told she is being investigated for accessing people's records, she would automatically know who reported her. In order to try and confirm for sure what she has good reason to assume, she may then have called her daughter and told her that her manager gave her Mick's name. She may have also been trying to see if her daughter knew that Mick had made the complaint.

It's not really a stretch to imagine that someone who underhandedly accesses people's personal files would also tell lies when caught out.

The OP said it WAS Mick who complained. See the post I have quoted above yours...

He should have discussed it with Fran first, but frankly, Betty does deserve to lose her job after this.

Wouldn't like to be in this situation though; the atmosphere is going to be permanently frosty! :eek:

DUTR

fierystormcloud wrote: »

The OP said it WAS Mick who complained. See the post I have quoted above yours...

He should have discussed it with Fran first, but frankly, Betty does deserve to lose her job after this.

Wouldn't like to be in this situation though; the atmosphere is going to be permanently frosty! :eek:

I still don't see the logic in that part of the debate?
Let's say Mick had snatched Bettys handbag with purse and mobile phone, should Betty 1st discuss this with Fran before complaining at the police station? I really don't see any difference .

Mojisola

DUTR wrote: »

I still don't see the logic in that part of the debate?
Let's say Mick had snatched Bettys handbag with purse and mobile phone, should Betty 1st discuss this with Fran before complaining at the police station? I really don't see any difference .

I don't see why he should have discussed it with Fran beforehand either, especially if he thought she would try to talk him out of reporting it, but he should have told her once it was done so that she heard it from him and not her Mum.

duchy

sheramber wrote: »

Tells you in the first post that Mick thought she had accessed his record becasue of something she said. Presumably something that she wouldn't have known without reading his medical records.

Lets assume that Betty is usually a good employee and in normal circumstances wouldn't dream of access records she shouldn't - but (wrongly) felt that she needed to check out on her daughter's new bloke . If she then slipped up by knowing something she shouldn't when speaking to the boyfriend -she may have realized and hoped he didn't pick up on it. If she was then subsequently pulled by her manager for unauthorized access then she wouldn't have to be a rocket scientist to work out Mick had picked up on what she said and put in a complaint.

Frankly she deserves everything she gets- It's drummed into everyone who works with personal data the rules AND the consequences. She has no right to be affronted - she broke the law and now needs to face the consequences.

Fran needs to just refuse to takes sides -If her Mum *did* access the records it will show up under her log in -if she didn't it won't.
If she did do it-it's hardly Fran's fault her Mother thought she is above not just her employer's rules but also the law !

If her Mum thinks she's entitled to do this-in Fran's shoes I'd be wanting to know if Mum made a habit of snooping on my friends over the years.

If she didn't then the investigation will also show this after the logs are checked.