When the privacy defense is offensive

Today Parker Donham posted an article in Contrarian about Dr. Jalal Hosein of Halifax who was twice reprimanded by the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSNS). Once for overprescribing opioids and once for conflict of interest.

In the latter case, Hosein "held a Power of Attorney for and later acted as executor and trustee for the estate of Mr. X. Dr. Hosein was also the trustee of the estate funds set aside to care for Mr. X's daughter Ms. X, also his patient, who was intellectually disabled and cognitively delayed." Rats and feces feature prominently in the decision of CPSNS

"Dr. Hosein left Ms. X to live in a neglected state and failed to report her as
an adult in need of protection."

Good riddance to now retired Doctor H. And a salute to CPSNS for courageous pursuit of justice.

More alarmingly, Donham reports "Adult Protection Services received complaints about (Ms. X's) condition in 2014 and 2016, but closed the file without action, apparently on Hosein’s assurances that all was well. It’s unclear whether APS visited her apartment. It finally acted in 2018, and the woman was hospitalized pending an appropriate placement."

Donham pursued this. "A spokesperson for the department told me she would probably be unable to provide any information about the case because of privacy rules. She promised to look into the matter and get back to me. I’ll let you know if she comes back with anything illuminating."

Adult Protection Services responded thusly "We take our role in the protection of Nova Scotia’s most vulnerable people very seriously. We cannot share information about individual cases due to privacy legislation. We can tell you, the department investigates allegations of abuse or neglect, and there may be situations when we work with our policing partners and the medical community to ensure people are safe. If an individual has information about a person in need of assistance, they have a duty to report it. This is particularly true for members of the medical community for whom it is their responsibility to advocate based on the best interests of their patients."

This is a lie. APS obviously did not adequately investigate "allegations of abuse or neglect" in 2014 and 2016. By extension, they most assuredly do not always take their "role in the protection of Nova Scotia’s most vulnerable people very seriously"

We are growing accustomed to this evasion of responsibility by the bureaucracy. In Newspeak, privacy the right becomes secrecy the excuse.

People know the difference, and it reflects poorly on civil servants. Surely we can know who screwed up without compromising Ms. X's identity. Surely we are entitled to know remedies are in place. Stonewalled by privacy, shall we mistrust all government action? We didn't invent it, but evidence says it's headed that way.