Failing to explain basics can only undermine confidence

The General Medical Council’s guidance says that most people understand and accept that information must be shared within the healthcare team in order to provide their care, a part of the guidance that Sokol conveniently overlooks.^{1 2}

Sokol suggests that patients will know this from observing practice in hospitals, and watching medical dramas on television; to ask doctors to provide leaflets explaining how information will be used, or to explain face to face, would be too tedious and time consuming for doctors.

Most young people’s expectation is that doctors will share their information with parents, social services, the police, and others. Many older people’s formative experience of health care is that of the singlehanded general practitioner, whose notes serve only as personal aide mémoire. And a substantial number of patients will have had little or no experience of Western health care (or less than accurate depictions of health care from soap operas) to inform their expectations. We would like patients to get their information from more reliable sources than urban myths and medical dramas.

Of course a balance needs to be found between informing patients (through a variety of media) about the uses to which their personal information might be put, so that they can exercise their legal rights, and overburdening them with details they have no desire to know. Our guidance makes that clear. But failing to explain even the basics to new patients—or to improve everyone’s understanding with posters, leaflets, and occasional verbal checks or reminders—can only serve to undermine confidence in the profession when unexpected disclosures are made. Providing information need not be unreasonably time consuming or burdensome to doctors or patients.