Identifiable relatives in the family history: not without individual consent

Abstract

The family history is a traditional section of the clinical record. Data on family members in the clinical record may be anonymous but yet these may be easily identifiable; therefore, exposing the relatives of the patient to the fact that a written record is produced, mentioning them, without their consent. This is in direct contradiction with European data protection and other regulations and in contradiction with a reasonable ethical perspective. For the purpose of obtaining an image of the present state of affairs, we used as a convenience sample, the series of Case Records published in 2019 in The New England Journal of Medicine (January to December). From a total number of 40 reports, identifiable relatives were present in 30. The number of identifiable relatives varied between none and 6. It is not the right of each individual to disclose sensitive clinical information regarding other persons, without consent from these latter. Family history should no longer include identifiable relatives, unless consent is obtained from each identifiable person. The authors offer the following guidelines on this topic: (1) Do not mention any identifiable relative of the patient in the medical history without consent from the said relative; (2) Do not mention in the family history clinical conditions seemingly unrelated to the present clinical situation; (3) Do not mention in the family history clinical conditions that the patient does not (him/) herself have and that may be seen as social stigmata; (4) Consult the institutional Ethics committee in case of reasonable doubt.

Gender Transition: Is There a Right to Be Forgotten?

“…Nonetheless, if data exist, even if private and only accessible under limited circumstances, the importance of not knowing can be compromised by unwanted revelations of information [ 4 ]. Given that information is registered, regardless of being under seal, the circumstance is different [ 54 ]. The right not to know is not assured following the availability of information.…”