Parental Responsibility Is Not a Right to the Record: Ask What Access Does for the Child
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
Parents often assume that if they have parental responsibility, they have a right to see their child’s medical record, which is understandable. .
Parental responsibility gives a parent important legal rights and duties in relation to their child. But it does not create an automatic entitlement to information held about that child.
The right of access belongs to the child and a parent may sometimes exercise that right on the child’s behalf. But the key question is not simply:
“Does this parent have parental responsibility?”
But rather
“Would allowing this parent access to the child’s medical information actually serve the child’s interests?”
That distinction becomes especially important where parents are separated, contact has broken down, there are allegations of abuse or coercion, or one parent no longer plays any meaningful role in the child’s day-to-day care.
Parental responsibility is only the starting point
Parental responsibility matters because it establishes a legal relationship with the child.
But the ICO makes clear that when considering access to a child’s information, organisations should take account of the child’s best interests, rights, welfare and privacy.
The BMA also makes clear that parental access should not be given where this conflicts with the child’s best interests.
So a practice think about the particular curcimstances of the case and consider
Is giving this parent access appropriate in these circumstances?
What if the parent is not caring for the child at the moment?
Our customers often see cases where a parent still has parental responsibility but:
Does not see the child at present
does not live with the child;
does not provide day-to-day care through custody arrangements; or
has no current role in managing the child’s healthcare.
In those circumstances, the benefit to the child of giving that parent detailed medical information may be much less obvious. The request may be driven more by the parent’s own need to understand, challenge or remain involved than by any current healthcare need of the child.
That does not automatically mean access should be refused. But it does make one question particularly important:
“What would giving this information to the parent actually achieve for the child at this time?”
This can be especially useful where family arrangements are contentious. A parent may say they are being unfairly excluded, that the other parent is preventing contact, that parental alienation is taking place, that allegations against them are false, or that they need the records for ongoing court proceedings.
Those concerns may be very real from the parent’s perspective. But the practice is not being asked to decide whether the parent has been treated fairly, or to determine who is telling the truth.
A GP practice is not a family court.
The practice is ONLY deciding whether disclosure would serve the interests of the child.
That keeps the decision focused on the child and often cuts through the noise of messy family arrangements.
A simpler way to think about it
In difficult parental access cases, three questions can be extremely useful:
1What benefit to the child would come from this parent having access?
Would it help them provide safe care?
Would it enable them to manage medication?
Would it allow them to understand a condition they need to deal with while the child is staying with them?
Would it support an active role in treatment?
If there is a clear child-centred benefit, that weighs in favour of disclosure.
3What disadvantage to the child would arise if access were not given?
If refusing access would prevent a parent from safely caring for the child, managing a serious condition or understanding medication while the child is in their care, that is highly relevant.
If there is no obvious detriment to the child from refusing access, that is also relevant.
Technology-facilitated coercion and control should also be considered.
Technological abuse, also known as technology-facilitated abuse, is the use of digital tools and devices by someone to harass, monitor, control, coerce, or intimidate another person
The practice does not need to prove that such misuse will occur, but where there are indicators of coercive control, stalking or abuse, those risks should form part of the decision about whether access serves the child’s interests.
What if the child is old enough to express a view?
A practical approach for practices
When dealing with a difficult parental request, practices could work through the following questions:
1. Does the requesting person have parental responsibility?
If not, another form of authority may be required.
2. What role does this parent currently have in the child’s care?
Do they provide day-to-day care?
Do they manage healthcare?
Do they have current contact?
3. What exactly are they asking for?
Is it limited information needed for care, or the complete medical record?
4. What benefit to the child would disclosure provide?
Can a clear child-centred purpose be identified?
5. What risk or disadvantage could disclosure create for the child?
Consider confidentiality, safeguarding, family conflict and privacy.
6. What disadvantage to the child would arise if access were refused?
Would refusal genuinely interfere with their care or welfare?
7. Are there allegations of abuse, coercion or significant family conflict?
If so, these should inform the risk assessment without requiring the practice to adjudicate the dispute.
8. Is the child old enough and sufficiently mature for their own wishes to be relevant?
If so, should they be consulted before disclosure?
Document the reasoning
These cases are often difficult precisely because there is no simple rule.
That makes documenting the reasoning important.
For example:
“Request received from parent with parental responsibility. Parent currently has no contact with the child and is not involved in day-to-day healthcare or treatment decisions. Full historical medical record requested during ongoing family proceedings. No clear healthcare benefit to the child identified from disclosure. Record contains sensitive/confidential information and there are allegations of family conflict. Further assessment required before any disclosure.”
Or:
“Parent has parental responsibility and regular overnight contact with the child. Child has a significant allergy and parent requires current medication and emergency-management information in order to provide safe care. Limited disclosure considered to serve the child’s interests.”
These records show that the practice considered the purpose and consequences of disclosure rather than relying only on parental status.
Comments