Be wary of what you say to your doctor

[RogerS]

OK...it's not your doctors' fault but some life insurance companies. Legal and General springs to mind.

Back in 1992 going through a period of intense work-related stress, and being in sales and marketing, my weekly units was a bit above the recommended levels. Only by about 15% and I did know how to calculate the units. I saw my GP over a completely different medical condition but in the course of the conversation he asked in passing how much was I drinking. I mentioned a little bit above and he suggested I should try and cut down to the recommended limit.

It's now in my medical notes. In 1992.

Legal and General now have a blanket ban on giving life cover to anyone who has been recommended to cutback their alcohol intake. Regardless of when. Regardless as to how much over the weekly limit.

So my life cover was refused. Even though my existing L&G policy is just about to end. Go figure. Apparently underwriting rules change all the time. At least, that's what L&G told me.

So be careful what you say.

 

[MikeG.]

How do they get access to your medical records?

 

[Woody2Shoes]

How do they get access to your medical records?

When I last signed up for insurance, I seem to remember that there was a clause in the agreement by which I gave consent for the insurer to check my records.

I'm reminded of that silly old thing about the definition of an alcoholic is someone who drinks more than their doctor!

 

[RogerS]

How do they get access to your medical records?

Simple. You tick the box on the application form that gives them access. No tick. No policy. Catch-22. They then hoover everything up. And I mean everything.

 

[RogerS]

And here's the irony. About 15 years ago I volunteered to act as a control into a study about NAFLD (non-alcohol related fatty liver disease). Had a stack of tests, MRI scan, you name it...coming up with a set of results for a baseline for someone without any liver problems. Had I had any liver problems then they would have been picked up pronto.

And when I joined the local surgery, part of their bloods was a set of liver function tests - all mid-point and baseline normal. So go figure.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The irony of the safe limit. My cousin was lectured at university ('80s) by the guy who formulated the first figures, and he told them that the figures originally were in no way designed to be a safe limit, they were the limit below which there was no conclusive proof of any harm whatsoever. As such the figure started at something like 70, and as it got bandied about from committee to committee everyone thought it wouldn't be a good idea to inform people that that was what they could safely drink and so salami sliced them.
Undoubtedly research has moved on but it makes me wonder. What is now supposedly a safe limit per week I used to exceed on a Sunday lunchtime.

 

[Mark A]

If a doctor's suggestion to reduce alcohol intake makes their policy null and void, what about smokers, overweight people, underweight people, depression or anxiety sufferers, extreme sport enthusiasts, couch potatoes? Maybe they should refuse everyone.

Reminds me of Admiral insurance group demanding speed awareness course details, when the entire purpose is to attend an educational course in lieu of penalty points and fine. Disclose and be penalised or lie and risk it.

 

[stuartpaul]

Whilst the tendency is to 'blame' the insurance company (and why not, - the blood sucking bottom feeders :twisted: ) it is almost certainly about actuarial tables.

Data gathered over tens of years showing a a person who is X% more (or in some cases less) than the norm isn't a good risk as Y% of them die earlier or are claimants.

For example, taking the Admiral example above, their data shows that people who've been on the course are at greater risk of having an accident. Therefore, in their eyes they are perfectly justified in doing what they do. If you don't like it go somewhere else (until they all start doing it).

It pays to remember that insurance companies are in business to make money not provide you and me with cover on our terms (they're still b'stards though!).

 

[lurker]

I find it difficult to believe a simple tick gives a commercial concern access to your medical records.
Certainly no GP would show them unless they ( the GP) was well paid for the effort.

Anyway it's just L& G loss you just go somewhere else.
My bank provides a life insurance for very little money and assumed that's what most folks did.

 

[NazNomad]

I've already claimed on my life insurance, nobody will touch me with a barge pole now. :-D

 

[RogerS]

I find it difficult to believe a simple tick gives a commercial concern access to your medical records.
Certainly no GP would show them unless they ( the GP) was well paid for the effort.

Anyway it's just L& G loss you just go somewhere else.
My bank provides a life insurance for very little money and assumed that's what most folks did.

I'm afraid that it is just a simple tick. And they only get £20. L&G have an electronic system that is supposed to extract only relevant details. Their system talks to the GP's system. At least that is what the practice manager told me. In reality, they suck out everything. I was curious to know what was being sent and so asked to see exactly what. All 188 pages. It was the lot. Actually thinking about this I wonder if this is legal. A question for the Data Commissioner I think.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

They've already linked car and household insurance on a central database, it's shortly to be linked to travel insurance. I wonder when health insurance will be linked as well?

 

[lurker]

Well if that's true just use someone else.
And then demand L&G to remove the data they hold a on you.
Demand evidence this has been done
This is in line with DPA

If enough folks used DPA regs they would soon stop this game.

 

[Claymore]

........

 

[lurker]

Knowing how badly GP practices are at managing business issues, I'd ask the practice for their procedures and maybe they will think twice about taking their 20 quid.

Or threaten this
https://www.gov.uk/data-protection/make-a-complaint

 

[RogerS]

Knowing how badly GP practices are at managing business issues, I'd ask the practice for their procedures and maybe they will think twice about taking their 20 quid.

Or threaten this
https://www.gov.uk/data-protection/make-a-complaint

The GP surgery are faultless in this respect as far as I can see.

 

[RogerS]

Right. Apparently there are two levels of access. This from the GoCompare website..

1) Insurers CANNOT access your medical records without your consent
2) If you authorise it doctors can pass relevant medical information on
3) Some insurers may ask for your authorisation through a subject access request - this may result in ALL your medical records being disclosed rather than just things considered relevant

The key wording is 'subject access request' and is clearly what the surgery supplied them ie all of my medical record. A fishing trip, to my way of thinking. I've looked at the documentation that I agreed to and nowhere does it use the phrase 'subject access request'.

A question for both my surgery and the Data Commissioner's Office.

 

[dcmguy]

Apart from the title of the thread being an eternal truism.. I have two observations for you.. for what little value they have!

1. One of my friends was joint no.2 actuary at Legal & General for a while...so I know it’s true that actuarial stats (based on experience) are what drive pricing and accept/reject decisions for insurance.

2. NHS Spine .. pretty much any group with a (genuine) need gets access to it.. so if you don’t want folk to have access to your medical data then never ever let it get on Spine. Once on, even if you ask for it to be taken off, the damage is done (all infrastructure .. and probably the media too..will have access to it.. legitimately or otherwise). If your data isn’t on Spine yet then one path may be to let docs etc know that you never want it to go on. .. and hope they co-operate.. though it may be deemed to be for the greater good (terrorism risk assessment etc) that everyone who uses NHS has their data made available.

So... back to the title of this thread .. very true indeed!

 

[Halo Jones]

It will only be so long before they get access to your supermarket loyalty card. Then most of are stuffed! I have a mate who never hands over his loyalty cards if he is buying booze or ready meals. Paranoia?

 

[dcmguy]

.. and don’t forget Amazon history!

As a keen supporter of our PM I’m very engaged with the balance between national security and freedom.. and my take is that the reality is that you’ve nothing to fear but yourself... unless of course someone hi in 5x5x5 decides to lie about you!