Justice For Families

Hi All

I need some Data Protection advise. Our's is a private law case and we have a Guardian ad Litem (Corrupt and Nightmare). Over the last 5 yrs the courts have had access to every detailed medical record of mine up to mid 2005. Then a psychologist report was ordered as GAL obsessed with my mental impairment (or lack of). For this I had to make my medical notes available to Psychologist, but at the time I had a sol on legal aid. As most of my notes were in court bundle, it was agreed my authorisation was to be from mid 2005 onwards. In the meantime my legal aid cancelled as LSC felt that I earned in excess of £38000 on a 20 hr job!!! So I took my rich litigant in person to tackle this problem.

My authorisation to doc made it clear that I needed to see notes before they are released, that they should not be disclosed to anyone but the psych and not be made part of bundle. I had also told psych that prior to mid 2005 records are in bundle. So now my records go to Psych and she complains to GAL's sol that records only mid 2005 onwards, and she discloses copy of my authorisation given to my GP as it was sent with medical notes to psych. Gal's sol is now asking court (High Court) for an emergency 15 min hearing asking for an order to release all my notes and those of kids, and to make them 'free of the various restrictions the mother unilaterally seeks to impose on their use'.

Can the High Court judge make such an order? Where do I stand with this level of inconvenience? What is the law on medical records? Hope someone here can assist.

The Judge can't order a GP to disclose your medical records. The GP is protected by "patient confidentiality".

You have to consent to your medical records being disclosed, which it sounds like you did. If there are medical records in a court bundle and you gave the rest of the new documents to the psychologist, I can't see any issue with your medical records.

Perhaps as a counter measure, ask the GP to list the titles and dates of your medical records. That way the psychologist can see a list of the records and what's available. They can see that they have all the records then.

Hi
I called the Information Commission Office on 01625545745 asking this very question and I was told that if a court so orders without my consent then the records would have to be released. He said that there is no law that can protect me and that I needed to get legal advise. He said that maybe the Human Rights law, but people apply to European courts to fight that end.

If thisis what the ICO helpline says then it is worrying.

In anycase, I had sent an email to GAL's sol indicating that records are in bundle, giving section and page number. Also send a position statement to court saying same, and appealing for us to get on as a familiy as no pathology or clinical condition was found. I hope the courts respond favourably.

Hi all sorry if it seems like am hijacking someone else's post. But i need to know the same thing . So there is no way they can gain access to my medical records with out my consent? And if i dont consent they cant look at them?

I heard right from a judge permission is needed otherwise the issue is going nowhere...

This is a really interesting point.

So we can see here, is a fishing expedition to gain evidence to turn against you (just like the police interviews...).

Have you consented?
Well we have "partial" consent.
The GAL's order will be to extend that. Would a judge agree?
The judge will be worried that if he refuses to extend the order, and the SS had asked for the evidence, that he could be held liable.
So my gut instinct on this one, under the mantra of "child protection" the judge would say yes.

The shrink will say she can't do the report without access to evidence.
That any conclusions she gives will be open to challenge, because she doesn't have full evidence etc.
So again the Judge would as a guess, agree to hand over your personal data.

However.
It is clear that we do not have complete consent.
Are we saying here that all consent is withdrawn rather than total consent is to be inferred.

If you argue that nothing prior to 2005 is relevant, then the counter agrument to you is that well then release it... if there's nothing there, you've nothing to worry about. But of course we know that corrupt GAL's will make up the evidence as they go along.

I have to agree totally with the ICO - I found out the hard way that there is not such thing as the "Hague convention, international law or European law" against a corrupt GAL, which we appear to have here.

The only way to remove the shrink (psychologist) report to have a psychiatrist report. If that goes against you, it's 50:1 against you with no exit strategy.

I think "partial consent" will be used as leverage against you.

If you withdraw consent, that will be used against you, so you're in a corner - pinned down by legal arguments.

Okay, what do you want from the GAL or from the system?
You're in court for 15 mins for a directions hearing, and that means you can ask for a shopping list while you're there. Don't waste this chance.

Use this hearing to "fish" for counter evidence against the gal.

The judge might say this isn't a public case, and your right to privacy prevails.... but still put the dagger in the GALS back and get a 2-1 bonus against the Gal.

Hi Thanks Secrets

In the past 6 yrs of this case I have signed 4 consents for the release of records. So by now they have ALL medical records. prior to 2005 are in the court bundle so why this... you are right it is a fishing exercise.

The interesting thing is that the psychologist raised this with the GAL's sol on 16th March, the date she received my statement to correct factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies. So pysch is annoyed, GAL is annoyed - and I have a feeling GAL has asked to see the notes as there is reference in there of my distress and fear of the GAL in 2007, then I knew not what I know now (and it is still limited).

I have filed a position statement with all the references in court bundle to get my records without doubling on resources, costs, etc. I hope the judge accepts this.

They also know that I don't have a mental impairment, my personality is reacting to the pressures put on me and kids by family courts - this is frightening. With my ex he told them his records were in bundle they took on board and asked for an update - which he did - no hassle. He is the one found to have clinical anxiety, etc and not sought help. at least I got help and moved on.

It seems these people will not give up because the GAL has a complaint on her and she will so what she can to prove her point in whichever way she can.

Lol. My GAL said to me "what about his reputation"... not about what he'd done to me or my daughter, all he's concerned about is his reputation... that shows us exactly what is wrong with CAFCASS. The failures of public law, are the failures of private law - same horse, different jockey!

So you've signed 4 consents. Then that's the GAL argument scuppered... and if they're all in the legal bundle, then she's a complete arse.

She's throwing her toys out of the pram, because of the complaint. But also showing up her "limited" abilities.

I wish I could say to "ignore her", but the CAFCASS gestapo have far too much power.

So they're in the legal bundle. And the GAL could forward them to the shrink if she could control her temper long enough.

Make her go to court and make an arse of herself.

But think up some "fishing" expeditions of your own, stuff you want out of the court - make up your christmas list and go ask the judge. You won't get all of it, but you might get one or two "gifts".

Play them at their own game. No wonder CAFCASS have failed every one of their OFSTED inspections. With staff like this.

If the Judge makes an order to a Doctor to disclose medical records, and you appeal the order using the right to keep information proivate, you stand a good chance of the apeal being sucessful.

The Judge ordering the medical note disclosure would need to be very careful that the medical notes are kept confidential and private and his order would need to reflect as much, with careful wording. It's possible for a Judge to make theorder but it's easier for everyone if you just consent. If something goes wrong, then it's hard to blame anyone other than yourself for consenting.

So my previous reply is not quiet correct, but generally, a court is reluctant to make unessesary orders. There would need to be compelling reason (and possibly some evidence) to say that making an order for disclosure is nessesary. I would imagine that there might also be a request for you to offer some reason to say why you are not consenting because that would be taken into consideration - if the Judge makes the order.

Why do the medical records need to be submitted? Why is a GP reference not sufficient?

I'm not even a party to the case and undue pressure was put on me to provide a medical reference. The judge even said that if I refused then that is something that the professionals would have to take into consideration and that the other side could use as a legal argument!

fassitangels wrote: The judge even said that if I refused then that is something that the professionals would have to take into consideration and that the other side could use as a legal argument!

It's just legal arguments, but a barrister would think all his birthdays have come at once.

They'd infer you're a total psycho, and it's *hidden* in those notes...
But of course, you have the right to privacy.

Just expect them to exploit your refusal.

Unfortunately there's no real counterargument that I've heard of, or I'd tell you straight away.

NO This is a set up , only read your post can they ......
I was asked by Judge Black , she is in the transcribes saying only to expert witnesses.
The sneeky child's solicitor offered to paginate them because they complained they were in no order.
They do not have time to read all the medical notes ; they go before a team to find what ever it is they are going to label you with.

Either way this is a set up.

This is a blatant example of yet another LG taking the lead to set up some other victim.
I can not warn enough of watch that child's sol and watch your back the LG.
For all of you who live down South I found the Coram list of barristers.
bit late for me now ; they gave me Mark De Sousa and they brought om Marcia Hyde barrister to see me off .
I got told she is some big gun lawyer in the city.

The Times just exposed her in a Luton case trying to stop contact on an interim care order.

Hi

Latest developments. On Friday Gal's sol sent me the psychologists report (addendum) dated 15th March 2009. In that she addresses questions I raised via statement asking her to correct inaccurracies and inconsistencies.

Then with my medical records, she writes that she has my medical records 1984 to 2004, and that they were not in order in the bundle (I am not responsible for poor bundle job) and that she just realised - that is took her from Nov 2008 till 15th March 2009 to realise there were gaps in these records. She then adds that records of Jan 2005 to mid 2005 not available and those from Nov 2008 to date not there. These creeps don't realise that is because I did not see my doc.

Anyway, what she has done is written every doc appointment by date and then written what it was about and then gave quotations from consultation. She did not do this with ex's mediacl notes. Only my notes and children's notes. She has not 'assessed' these notes. She saw my report from memory clinic of 2007 and wrote about it -cleverly omitting the bit that all these experiences are due to abuse from ex. In anycase, her assessment stands as it is that her findings do not change, i.e. no clinical syndromes or psychopathy.

Now, gal's sol writes to me yesterday with this report that he wants me to consent to the release of ALL my medical to psychologist, to go direct from my GP to Pyschologist and that psych can use the information in which ever way she pleases, and that if I do not then they wil ltake it up at the next review hearing - i.e. not the one he asked for in emergency but the one scheduled in April.

These lot are up-to something rotten.

One of the ways to degrade a person is to strip them naked, to make matters worse, you pass degrading comments about that person. If you want to humiliate the person even more, you make the sensitive and degrading information public.

In the court process, everything should be transparent and open. If the process isn't, then a party can claim that the hearing is unfair.

In the case, there is a guardian, who you know nothing about, you don't know about the other cases she has failed on, you don't know about how many families she has destroyed or how many complaints she has about her.

Conversely you don't know about how many families she helped or children she helped save.

The guardian must feel nice and protected at knowing that you know nothing about her and at the same time the guardian feels all high and mighty knowing that your sensitive past is going to be exposed and she can pass degrading comments about you... in the name of keeping children safe.

Appointed experts have a duty to the court. They are expected to give the Judge the information he needs to make the right (best) order. The Judge can't be asked to Judge evidence is the evidence can't be disputed by any party.

In some cases experts are needed to advise the Judge. A Judge is an expert in law. A medical expert has to advise the Judge on medical matters. A financial expert has to advise a Judge on financial matters. Ultimately the final decision rests with the Judge, who makes a decision based on the evidence he has available to him.

If you can avoid the use of experts, it's much better and easier. If you can avoid a guardian, that would be an all round win. Guardians seem to cause more problems believing they know what children "want" and "need", expecting all children to want and need what ever their training tells them children need and want.

If there are gaps in the medical history, try to fill the gaps. If you didn't attend the Doctor during that time, fill the gap with a response statement to say that you didn't attend the Doctor.

When all the gaps are closed, then that part of the case is complete and the case can move to a final hearing.

You would need to read the letter of instruction and see if there is an expectation that the expert goes more in depth on one person and less on another.

Keep in mind that the expert should have some of the court bundle and the expert should know about which application is being considered.

The Court has a paramount principal to children and it's assumed that the parent who has the most exposure to the children should be looked at closest. The parent with less involvement seems to get less attention, which by nature sounds practical but the person with less attention is usually the one causing problems. I have read 500 to 600 pages of report on one parent because they have so much history. The absent parent's history was about 10 pages....10 pages of problems. the 500 odd page document was detailed and specific, loads were repeated.

The case is in court because 2 parents (sometimes 3) can't agree. The Judge is being asked to make an order. The Judge can't get the parents to agree, so he has to have accurate information which is also complete. The Judge is unlikely to make an order if the information asked for can be obtained. Everyone should want to get to a final hearing, so the simple solution is to help the expert advise the Judge.

The issue of detailed information about the absent parent...it sounds like you are going to get another addendum report. If you feel that the content of the absent parents records should be listed, ask the expert to apply the same presentation for both parents to allow a comparison possibility. If in the event the expert wants to decline, the expert should be asked to state that they refuse to provide the information to the court in their report..... which would render their services as (possibly) unfair. There might be another reason.

If the report could be seen as unfair, can a Judge give much weight to the report?

Hi

We were in court yesterday and listed for a lower court judge. Anyway, once in he soon realised this case was not his jurisdiction and asked us to go next door to a high court judge. So we waited and then we were back in with this lower court judge who invited the children's barrister to make her wish list. This judge knows this case from his 'full-time employment' days - he is now retired and sitting part-time. He knew this was not his jurisdiction and gave whatever was needed - a full disclosure of mine and kids' medical records - I argued saying all that is asked for is in teh legal bundle, he ignored me; I said this is corruption and a money making exercise - he said 'you'd feel that' - I said it would be a violation of my human rights, and he said that he is of the view that things should not have been made to get this far (I guess he meant me still having the kids as he was the one that got the GAL on-board). I said i will appeal and he said 'you can, and I am sure you will take advise on this. I am making this order'.

This case of our's is a high court case and reserved to be heard by a specific judge - so how can they do this. To make matters worse, the GAL and sol came to see kids last night - all smiley as though nothing happened. I carried on gardening as i needed to.

Then today I get an email from GAL's sol attaching copy of an unsealed order that says it was made by the judge, omitting the word 'deputy' from his title, and then wrote that the High Court Judge passed it down to him to deal with... I know not of such a hearing or permission, no order or paperwork. Sol also wrote that he was told I would appeal and that I would have to appeal in London and that I needed to get a stay of execution and would have to go to Family division at Court of Appeal, who might ask me to go back to this court and if I was to do so he would inform the judge and I would not get a stay of execution.

How can this be happening??? I must say if I did not have the support of NRParent via text, etc then I would have come out with my eyeballs in my hands; totally bewildered and disgusted. The barrister knew it would be wrong for this judge to hear the case, they all knew of the order made to reserve this case for a specific judge, yet they can go ahead and do this.

Needless to say, I am appealing, but any advise and 'tips' or 'pitfalls' would be appreciated.