[LINK] The "health" record security model

Jim Birch planetjim at gmail.com
Tue Nov 13 09:32:05 AEDT 2018

On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 17:28, David <dlochrin at key.net.au> wrote:

It's not even a document-management system as far as I can tell, it's more
> of a badly designed drop-box.

I don't quite understand what you're saying here.  It is a document
management system as a matter of fact because it actually manages
documents.  However, it has quite different objectives to most document
management systems that you may or may not be familiar with.  Basically it
presents a few views of a single patient's records.  It doesn't need all
the usual classification and searching stuff.  It doesn't choose what is
relevant that's up to the medical practitioner.

> MHRecord seems to have been "designed" by a committee with little
> collective understanding of the current practice of medicine in its various
> contexts.  The fact patient information is held as a collection of PDFs and
> system security is non-existent suggests there hasn't been any IT&C
> expertise either.  No wonder there's apparently no publicly documented
> Systems Requirements Specification or System Architecture.

"designed" or designed?  I guess you prefer the pejorative.

by a committee?  Do you think it should be designed by an individual or is
this just a random pejorative thrown in.

"with little collective understanding of the current practice of medicine
in its various contexts." Less than you?  Seriously?  Records are one of
fundamental pillars of medicine, historically, now and into the future.

A massive amount of work went into this system.  It's a big projects.  Big
projects have problems.   That's normal.  The project has multiple
conflicting design objectives that have to be wrangled out and compromises
reached.  That's normal.  I'm 100% sure that this project could have been
better managed.  The fact that you poo-poo it doesn't prove a lot.  Be
specific.  What are your improved design element?

> However ATO, Centrelink, the police, and others have access to MHRecord.
> Why?  That strongly suggests the real aim is to spy on citizens, and if
> there's a residual health benefit, it's incidental.

"Real aim is to spy on citizens"  "incidental residual health benefit"
Hello?  You have completely departed from reality. This is paranoid.  Do
you really believe that there is a cabal of evil men sitting somewhere in
Canberra designing a health record system just so they can control the
country via access to people's health records?  How [expletive deleted]
does that work?   These are your health records!  What are they going to
do: send you spiteful emails about your arthritic elbow to make you vote
liberal? Make the flu punishable with a two year jail term?  Please explain
how that might work in actual harms and actual mechanisms.  It sounds
completely insane to me.  That fact that you can say things like that and
expect to be taken serious says something about the mythological dimension
of this debate, to me, at least.


More information about the Link mailing list