Thursday, March 22, 2012

Senate Committee Recommends Electronic Health Records

The Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs has reported on the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Records Bill 2011,19 March 2012. Despite privacy concerns expressed in evidence to the committee, the report largely supports the implementation of eHealth records.

The committee made three recommendations:
  1. (2.24) The committee recommends that the review of the operation of the Act that will occur after two years pursuant to Clause 108 specifically consider the issue of the appropriateness of the vesting of the System Operator responsibility in the Secretary of the Department of Health and Ageing as well as possible alternative governance structures.

  2. (2.46) The committee recommends that the review of the operation of the Act that will occur after two years pursuant to Clause 108 consider the opt-in design of the system including consideration of the feasibility and appropriateness of a transition to an op-out system.

  3. (2.85) The committee recommends that the bills be passed.

From: Chapter 2 - The bills, Personally Controlled Electronic Health Records Bill 2011, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs, Parliament of Australia, 19 March 2012.
Contents

An overview of the PCEHR system

2.5 The PCEHR system will enable any Australian to register for an eHealth record and at the time of registering choose who will be able to access their record and the level of access that those parties may have. Consumers who elect to register will also be able to nominate a representative to help them manage their PCEHR.[5] ...

2.11 Submitters to the inquiry have been in favour of the benefits that will result from the implementation of the PCEHR system, many recognising that it is time that such a system were implemented. ...

2.18 Part 2 of the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Records Bill 2011 (PCEHR Bill) sets out the governance arrangements for the PCEHR system.[19] Part 2 identifies the System Operator and specifies advisory bodies to the System Operator.[20] ...

2.21 The Australian Privacy Foundation (APF) went as far as suggesting that implementation of the PCEHR system should be delayed until the governance arrangements set out in the bill are changed. Implementation on the basis that after two years the System Operator role would be transitioned to an independent body was not enough to allay their concerns ...

2.22 The Medical Software Industry Association (MSIA) also 'believes the System Operator (as described) is impossibly conflicted with roles as System Operator, System funder, and NEHTA Board Member.'[26] ...

From: Personally Controlled Electronic Health Records Bill 2011, Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs, Parliament of Australia, 19 March 2012.

No comments:

Post a Comment