Healthcare Ethics: Rebuttal Debate

Running head: HEALTHCARE ETHICS: REBUTTAL DEBATE
HEALTHCARE ETHICS: REBUTTAL DEBATE
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1HEALTHCARE ETHICS
In Australia, ‘My Health Record’ is a digitalized version of records of individuals’ health
status which is accessible online for treatment as well as health monitoring by citizens and health
professionals alike. The facility of ‘My Health Record’ in Australia, allows citizens of the nation
to update details of their health, medications and disease conditions online in the form of a
personal health record (Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, 2019). ‘My Health
Record’ also allows health professionals to access, view and update health records and details of
their patients to ensure healthcare deliverance which is convenient, quick and patient-centered
(Schofield, Shaw & Pascoe, 2019). Despite the benefits of personalized health documentation,
‘My Health Record’ poses potential disadvantages for long term complications for vulnerable
populations, such as those with mental health issues. It is hence, desirable that such communities
are not granted the choice of accessing or availing ‘My Health Records’ (Hemsley et al., 2016).
Hence, this rebuttal is in support of the argument that vulnerable populations with mental illness
should not have a choice regarding ‘My Health Records’ Australia. Firstly, parties against this
motion advocate the key Recommendations postulated by the Australian Commission on Safety
and Quality in Healthcare (ACSQHC, 2019) which necessitates healthcare organizational leaders
to ensure availability of patient centered healthcare systems and facilities. Indeed, restricting the
rights of individuals’ with mental health issues to access ‘My Health Records’ is a serious
violation of national recommendations to provide patient centered care of optimum quality to
citizens (Delaney, 2018). However, it is worthwhile to note that ACSQHC (2019) also postulates
the necessity for individuals to possess the required capacity and skills to effectively interact
with health professionals in a patient centered manner. According to the Office of the Public
Advocate (2019) in Australia, ‘mental capacity’ implies the ability of individuals to understand
information provided to them, utilize the given information to take a decision, retain the given

2HEALTHCARE ETHICS
information for a time adequate enough to implement decisions and engage in communicating
such information to others. According to Farer (2016), essential skills of mental capacity such as
sound decision making are largely disrupted in mental health conditions like depression and
anxiety, the two most prevalent mental health conditions in Australia. In such situations, as
postulated in the research by Schwartz (2015), granting vulnerable individuals with mental
health issues a choice of accessing, manipulating and updating health details in ‘My Health
Records’ defeats the very purpose with which such healthcare documentation facilities have been
developed – that is, to appropriately and accurately communicate health needs and details and
relay the same to healthcare professionals for improved healthcare service deliverance. Secondly,
parties against this motion advocate that ‘My Health Records’ possess facilities arrange by the
Australian Digital Health Agency (2019), which allow individuals to grant accessibility of their
healthcare details to members of their families who can then upload or update necessary details
in circumstances of reduce mental capacity in such individuals. However, it must be noted from
the research by Rezaeibagha, Win and Susilo (2015), that granting such access to family
members without the consent of the patient with reduced mental health capacity is a serious
hindrance to an individual’s right to privacy and confidentiality. Further, as researched by Mann
(2018), breaches in privacy by granting free access of a patient’s healthcare records to their
families raises an ethical issue, especially in case of adolescents and young adults with mental
health issues or familial conflicts who may not wish their personal health information to be
viewed by their parents. Such easy accessibility may negatively impact the emotional and social
wellbeing of individuals with mental health issues who may now be reluctant to seek help or
mental healthcare services, hence increasing their progression of mental health symptoms, loss of
quality of life and increased disease burden in later life (Mann, 2018). Thirdly, parties against the