|
|
Post by spaceyone on Mar 15, 2012 12:17:23 GMT 7
By the way, during the commotion I had with the GP's clinic on Monday, I phoned to ask if my son was also banned from going there. The receptionist called up his file, then refused to tell me, since he is over over 18, and therefore has a right to privacy.
He has been there recently. He is not on a care plan, nor on disability pension. He has a bone tumor in his arm, which requires regular monitoring because it could turn cancerous.
Tell me again, that we got dumped because of our own actions?
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Mar 24, 2012 10:38:58 GMT 7
Privacy fear over agencies’ mega-merger: Medicare, Centrelink data plan8 April, 2011 by St Michael in Uncategorized MEDICARE and Centrelink are involved in an Orwellian mega-merger that will strengthen data linkages to citizens’personal information, say consumer advocates. The changes — part of the Gillard government’s service delivery reform program — are in the Human Services legislation amendment bill 2010. After a three-week inquiry, the Senate Community Affairs committee is due to report on the bill today. Australian Privacy Foundation health spokeswoman Juanita Fernando said the bill was geared more towards delivering an Orwellian society than citizens’ services. “I am amazed the government has not told Australians that integration of Medicare and Centrelink services under a single shopfront will result in many new linkages of data,” Dr Fernando said. “The bill is dreadful. Data linkages have already commenced. “We are concerned more linkages between Medicare, which hosts the centralised repository of individual healthcare identifiers, and Centrelink is the thin edge of the wedge.” Parliamentary secretary for community services Julie Collins said integration into a single department would bring together back-office functions to improve efficiency, reduce costs and free up staff. “Increased self-service options will allow people to manage their own affairs, including through expanded online services,” Ms Collins said, adding that the government was conscious of the need to protect customer data. “Importantly, any new sharing of customer data within the integrated department will occur only with customer consent. “We are particularly aware of the trust Australians place in Medicare’s management of their clinical information. For this reason, clinical data will be excluded from any data sharing under service delivery reform.” But Dr Fernando said the bill made no reference to the rich Individual Healthcare Identifier database and possible ramifications for access to services. New information supplied by Human Services to the Senate inquiry had raised further concerns. “(The bill) empowers the department to seize computer equipment that potentially contains large numbers of patient records,” she said. “One’s personal information is no longer limited to 600,000 health professionals (via the IHI service). Now it is available to an additional 27,000 Centrelink employees and agents and access points employing any number of staff.” The Consumer Health Forum was concerned the bill “substantially reduced” Medicare’s obligation to notify patients when their medical records were seized during the course of an investigation, chief executive Carol Bennett said. The bill says it would be “onerous and expensive” to notify patients where large numbers of records were seized, and could cause needless worry. Medicare would only be required to contact individuals when clinical information was exposed. “Australians assume the information Medicare holds about them will be protected and they will be informed of any atypical access to it,” Ms Bennett said. “CHF is concerned that if Medicare has the power to seize and examine records without being required to notify patients, there will be more inappropriate access to information.” Liberty Victoria spokesman Tim Warner said provisions for an individual’s right to privacy were weak and piecemeal, and controls over data-matching would be “even more pathetic” when all the databases were held by one department and accessed from one set of terminals. “The most mealy-mouthed promise is that many databases will only be linked at the customer’s request,” Mr Warner said. “It doesn’t require the screen-writing talents of James Cameron to envisage a pensioner who is dependent on the case officer’s goodwill for food and shelter being asked: ‘May I link your pension record with your other records?’ It would a brave soul who answered no.” Mr Warner said a stronger privacy culture was needed before such a bill was contemplated, including criminal penalties for those selling or misusing personal data. Australian Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim said the merged department was expected to have appropriate protocols in place covering the handling of personal information. “We understand that, if the bill is passed, Medicare intends to update its investigations protocols and will consult with us during this process,” Mr Pilgrim said. The Privacy Commissioner’s Office was paid $412,500 to provide Human Services with privacy advice for the year to January 31. More than $11 million has been paid to consultants and advisers on the service delivery reform project over the past two years, with Boston Consulting pocketing $6.75m for a business framework, $1.1m for a business plan, and another $616,000 for strategic advice. KPMG was paid almost $975,000 for management advisory services. www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/privacy-fear-over-agencies-mega-merger-medicare-centrelink-data-plan/story-e6frgakx-1226025592629
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Mar 27, 2012 13:24:02 GMT 7
After posting this article about infringements of privacy issues that would occur once Centrelink was given new powers to audit our medical records, I finally realized why I was banned from my current GP.
I saw in the last set of documents I had received from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner's Office, that I had been audited half way through last year. They audited my bank accounts, my immigration records and my medical records.
That was done after the last time I had seen the GP, and I had not seen him since then, until recently.
It occurred to me later, that I was possibly dropped by the GP, because I had been audited. Rather than bring trouble upon himself, he decided it was better to dump myself and my son, rather than have Centrelink on his back about anything.
Not good.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Mar 27, 2012 13:30:23 GMT 7
I had a story I wanted to post, but hadn't got around to doing it. A man I had met while moving house, had told me a little bit about his battle to get onto DSP.
He had moved up this way, when sick and unable to work, and then his mother had died and left him all alone in the world. He had gone to live in a caravan park, paying $165 a week for rent, out of his unemployment benefits. He was struggling for a long time, without much money left for food. He had already applied for DSP and been turned down.
Finally, his GP rang Centrelink and told them that if they did not put the man on DSP immediately, that he would sue them himself, for ignoring all of his medical evidences and reports. Centrelink quickly caved in and granted DSP.
The person concerned, then found himself a permanent rental at a reasonable price, although it is only a one room shack, and can now afford to eat properly and live with dignity.
Once again I stress, Centrelink getting the GP's off our side and onto theirs, will lead to serious injuries and death, once we no longer have a champion to help us prove our cases to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by rowdy on Mar 27, 2012 13:32:03 GMT 7
I had a story I wanted to post, but hadn't got around to doing it. A man I had met while moving house, had told me a little bit about his battle to get onto DSP. He had moved up this way, when sick and unable to work, and then his mother had died and left him all alone in the world. He had gone to live in a caravan park, paying $165 a week for rent, out of his unemployment benefits. He was struggling for a long time, without much money left for food. He had already applied for DSP and been turned down. Finally, his GP rang Centrelink and told them that if they did not put the man on DSP immediately, that he would sue them himself, for ignoring all of his medical evidences and reports. Centrelink quickly caved in and granted DSP. The person concerned, then found himself a permanent rental at a reasonable price, although it is only a one room shack, and can now afford to eat properly and live with dignity. Once again I stress, Centrelink getting the GP's off our side and onto theirs, will lead to serious injuries and death, once we no longer have a champion to help us prove our cases to them. Good post and well put Spacey. |
|
|
|
Post by latindancer on Mar 27, 2012 16:36:31 GMT 7
I second that.
I myself would not have been on DSP if it had been for the first...government-employed doctor they sent me to. He asked only 3 questions and that was it. I found out that he had recommended I not be given DSP, even though Centrelink had sent me to him with a view to putting me on it.
I stood up for myself and asked to be sent to a real, independent professional of their choosing. He confirmed my condition to be serious.
If people are sent in the future to people like the first doctor, things will not go well...........
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Jun 20, 2012 7:16:26 GMT 7
Just for your information Latin Dancer. I received a letter from the Health Care Complaints Commission regarding the GP dumping myself and my son at the beginning of the year.
Turns out the only reason he could give for that, was that on one day in particular I was phoning in his staff and being quite rude to them.
Funnily enough, that turned out to be 2 days after they had banned me, and I was phoning them to demand that they release my two final visits to the Osteopath, to which I was entitled and they had previously chosen to withhold.
In light of some things which are happening for us at the moment, the investigator has decided to keep the case open and have another look at it.
The bone in my son's arm might have turned cancerous in the past few months. But the radiology place won't put that in writing, and are refusing to release a final report for the latest Xray.
Maybe because they have been caught out, for falsifying the CT scan earlier in the year, at the suggestion of someone from Human Services, and now they are almost liable for legal action.
We had gone back to the old GP to get the referral for the XRay, and now he won't tell us what it means either. I even phoned back and asked again. All he will tell us is to go and see the Specialist. However, when I did finally phone the specialist's offices, I find he is on holidays.
So, if I seem even more bitter and angry lately, it all comes back to our current discussion. If Centrelink staff are not only allowed to overrule medical evidence, affect our relationships with our GP's, and even go so far as to adversely affect our radiology reports, people will be injured and some may die.
Don't forget I caught them out tampering with my own radiology reports when I applied for DSP.
Its been nearly three weeks now, and no one will tell me if my son has cancer. All because they are more concerned about covering their asses on this very issue.
We will go to the hospital today and see what we can find out. But we are already suffering from Centrelink fatigue, from all the problems they have caused us, and we also have medical profession fatigue, from getting the run around and lied to for so long. It;s hard to find the strength to even deal with what we are now facing, and to tell ourselves that is even worth bothering to try to address it.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Jun 20, 2012 8:46:35 GMT 7
Thanks for this link Banker. I had some trouble finding the video of the story, but once I did, it was worth the watch. au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/health/article/-/13986584/battling-cancer-and-centrelink#fopA lady undergoing chemo for breast cancer, was told that she is not sick enough for DSP. The illness was not considered to be life threatening. Well if the chemo doesn't work, then yes, she is back to being terminally ill. This is apart from the fact that chemo leaves one weak and vomitting and not able to go near other people, so they don't catch germs. Yet she should be working 7+ hours per week. Wait for Hank at the end! He gives the good news, that once they had added some other medical issues, to the cancer, then they were able to push it over the impairment table's line, and the lady onto DSP. Hooray for Hank and the Centrelink team for doing their jobs so well, yet again! (sarcasm) |
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Jun 21, 2012 15:56:47 GMT 7
Had good news today - no cancer in my son's arm. Four hours at the hospital, to find out what was going on, when the stupid GP could have just told us, if he had half a brain. When we arrived, wanting to be told the result of the Xray I had bought in, plus all other relevant films and their reports, I stated that we had to come to the hospital because Centrelink keeps turning our doctors against us. I showed her the letter from same ER from December, telling us to get a GP and have a CT scan. I described the encounters with the two GP's since then, crappy radiology reports, and that Centrelink had been behind it all. The nurse told us that one of the Doctors on duty that day, also has a private practice. Told the same story to the ER Doctor, and next thing we were being referred for another XRay and a CT scan, within the hospital (the CT scanner is new), and had the results a few hours later. Actually, he was the same ER doctor who had bumped my son up to the emergency list, and was the only reason we got surgery before he died, last time. The technicians studied all the films thoroughly, compared them to what they had in their records, and all of the ones I had bought from earlier times. Then we finally got the all clear, and a definate answer about what was going on in there. When it was all done, the Doctor bought up the fact that my son is in a bad position, in that the tumor is not big enough to operate on again yet, so he has to live with the pain and restriction of movement, until it is. He understood that having already been doing that, must be making life hard for him. He asked what Centrelink payments my son got, and was satisfied when I replied that I had finally forced the Disability Allowance out of them earlier this year. We hired him on the spot, he is our new GP. He replied that he would be happy to have us as his patients, because while we are annoying in that the situation is not easily fixed, we are at least a very interesting case.  I plan to expose this information we have uncovered that all these bumbling GP's are doing it to us deliberately, to get bonuses from Medicare and Centrelink, and that our government planned and implemented it against us. As usual, they haven't heard the last from me ....  |
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Jun 21, 2012 17:31:18 GMT 7
Great news Space, at least some things have started going right for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceyone on Jun 21, 2012 19:10:02 GMT 7
Great news Space, at least some things have started going right for you. I have another crazy story, which I didn't post. Partly because it did throw me into a spin, and the people who watched me go through it, could hardly believe it as well. It also ties in with the discussions we have been having, and why it is all firing me right up about this crap. I would say that all the specialists and GP's have all been promised protection from being sued for negligence, if they go along with all of these medical deceptions. Around the time I made the appointment for my son's recent XRay, I also put in an online query with Slater and Gordon, for a no win, no pay law suit against our specialist for medical negligence. They phoned me the next morning, and wanted more details. I provided them, and the person spoke to someone else, then said she would send it to Sydney, and we would hear from a laywer within 48 hours. Instead, we got a call that afternoon, wanting to set up a phone conference. I made it for the end of the following week, to allow time to have the Xray and get the result. Stupid me, during my 'discussions' with Centrelink the next week, finally let it slip that I was looking into that. They knew they would look pretty stupid, for overruling his medical certificates and then loosing them all, as their treatment of us would be mentioned if it all ended up in court. On the day of the phone conference with the lawyer from Slater and Gordon, she told me that my son had cancer, and has had it for the whole two years of this ordeal. She told me that he was going to die, and so there was no one to sue, since there was nothing anyone could have done to save him. She said she was surprised that no one had told me yet. I disagreed with her, and told her that it had never been at the cancerous stage. That was a possible outcome, and why it was important to keep an eye on it, which no one except for myself did. She told me she had worked on a case involving Osteochrondromas before, and that the person died. That there had been an incorrect radiology result at one stage, and the tumor turned cancerous in the period after that, yet the judge found that even if that had not happened, the man (who had also had his leg amputated) would have still died. I told her that was one case, and an exception. That the condition he has is not cancer or fatal, and that even if it does turn to that, there are things they can do to treat it. She again asserted that she was right and I was not. She told me that she had learnt everything she knew about the subject from the two best bone specialists in Sydney. She stated again that my son had cancer, and will die. I told her that I had all of his test results, and she might like to send them to her specialists and see what they had to say about this case. But that would cost $600 she exclaimed! Before she could start on me again, I told her that my son was not going to die, and that her and I had nothing else to talk about, and ended the phone call. I went and picked up my son, then rang her boss when I got home, because I was furious. My nurse friend arrived at the same time, and told me that it is illegal for anyone but a doctor or specialist to tell a person something like that, and was also shocked at what she had done. The boss was out, but rang me back the next week. At first he was contrite, and offering to send my son to the specialists, or maybe even take on the case. I left him to work out what he wanted to do for us, while I went back to trying to find out what the status of the tumor was. The next time he rang me back, he had changed his stance. The lawyer lady is denying it all, saying I misunderstood everything she said, so he no longer cares about the pain and suffering she caused us. I asked him if he was aware that she had put it in writing. He was worried, but again claims they can deny that is what she means. I told him I have a bit of trouble with government departments after recent threats and grounds to sue them, and asked him outright who had put the lawyer up to it. He finally replied very quietly that no one did, but he didn't seem very confident about that. The conversation I had with the lawyer lady was being recorded at the time, by a stenographer or someone. The lawyer asked me to slow down at one stage, so that they could keep up with me. They now claim they did not keep a transcript of the conversation. I am lodging a complaint about it with the Legal Commissioner, and with todays news that the tumor has not turned cancerous, contemplating a law suit against them now . So, it seems to me, Centrelink reached out to protect those who they had asked to defraud us medically, and what a nasty way to try to knock me down. Especially when I had a pile of appeals to prepare for all the FOI annotation requests I was trying to make to my records. I nearly missed the deadline, but was up at dawn on that morning, lodging them ready for when they all arrived at work. And then Slater and Gordon threatened to sue me, if I posted my story the net. So, I had searched Slater and Gordon to see if they had ever been involved in any scandals, and guess what I found. Not only did Juliar work there, and leave in a cloud of allegations of fraud, but her old boss and good buddy was later appointed to a very high post on the bench, which he wasn't really qualified for. “Julia Gillard had criminal allegations made against her in 1995 when she was accused of helping her boyfriend steal over $1,000,000 from the Australian Workers Union (AWU) and helping him spend the money on such things as her personal home renovations and dresses. Julia Gillard has never denied helping him rip off the $1,000,000 plus dollars, what she has done is denied doing it knowingly. Her part was helping set up an account called the “AWU Members Welfare Association No 1 Account” and possibly other accounts that the money was laundered through when she was a lawyer working for Slater and Gordon who were the solicitors representing the Australian Workers Union. The allegations against Julia Gillard were initially raised in the Victorian Parliament in 1995″. www.electionnow.com.au/?p=616 |
|
|
|
Post by numpty on Oct 5, 2012 14:10:16 GMT 7
2 days ago my doctor of ten years refused to have anything to do with completing my medical assessment.
I've been on DSP since March 2006 and have been reviewed 3 times over the years all by my regular GP.
This time she told me that because I had'nt seen her in the last 12 months she is unable to help me.
She gave me the names of a few other doctors who I had seen (just to get a new prescription). So now I have to see one of them who I have no history with and don't even remember what they look like.
I called centrelink (only on hold for 29mins this time) to explain why I would be late submitting my assessment, and I asked the person about this 12 month rule. I was told they'd never heard of that and it just needs to be my normal treating GP.
I got a weird feeling about the way my doctor was acting when she shunted me away. Any advice Banjo ?
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherdsp on Oct 5, 2012 16:18:27 GMT 7
to numpty, i read in my file how C/L had talked to my doctor about me,my doctor told me she has never talked to them and doesnt want to waste her time with them. next appointment i showed her the page out of my file as to what they said she said!! SHE WAS NOT A HAPPY CAMPER!! HAVE YOU GOT A COPY OF YOUR FILE?? it is a good thing to do,you can apply online!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Banker on Oct 5, 2012 19:21:25 GMT 7
|
|
|
|
Post by numpty on Oct 6, 2012 11:58:34 GMT 7
Thank you
|
|
