Why doctors? Filming patients would be a nightmare in terms of privacy and data policy.
In my line of work (psychotherapy) it would be equally impossible. People are having a hard enough time as it is opening up to medical professionals, I don’t think that the additional barrier of being actively filmed would help anyone.
Youth corrections staff is still a whole other story than doctors though. A physical examination is probably one of the most vulnerable positions one could be in. These cameras would record people getting naked, multiple orifices being examined, and patients talking about symptoms or things they are unsure and often ashamed about.
The cost would be enormous. I imagine many people would be even more reluctant to go to the doctor than they are now.
And the benefit, in my opinion, would be very slim. Medical malpractice is far more subtle than the examples from the article. As patients we’re rarely worried that our doctor will physically assault us, we’re worried about errors in judgement, delays in care, and prejudices based on gender, ethnicity, age, sexuality, and so on. And those aren’t directly observable most of the time. Even if you get the moment on camera where your doctor decides to trivialize your symptoms you mostly wouldn’t be able to prove it happened for discriminatory reasons.
I had just gotten fired from a job, was in the elevator going up to a Gym with my sister in NYC, and Peter Jennings got in, I was telling my sister my tale of woe, and Jennings turns to me and says, "don't worry about it, I've gotten fired from plenty of jobs". rip pete.
It’d be on record by the same organisation that has access to your medical records anyway. Doctors are frequently known for abuse of power over disabled patients, trans patients, racialised patients, etc, so it makes it easier to take action against negligent/abusive doctors.
I guess it depends on where you are. Here medical records are on a centralised computer system already.
At least on a centralised computer system one would hope that the state would hire someone competent to set it up and harden it. Whereas there’s only so much you can do to physically protect a piece of paper from being accessed—although I suppose also less likely that malicious actors would try to do a physical heist to steal paper medical records too.
Just make sure that you're not in a two-party consent state, otherwise even if you catch something egregious being done to you, it may not be admissible as any sort of evidence.
Note that this may not apply if you are in a public area or an area accessible to the public, however, even with that a competent lawyer may be able to get that evidence excluded based on the consent rules in your state or country.
body cams only make any sense when you’re not in a fixed location and already always on camera, or when there’s commonly abuses of power off camera. both are true of cops. neither are true of the cashiers at Hot Topic or whatever.
True. Today. But should have said I’m imagining a black Mirror future where things are so bad and the tech so cheap, that corps decide they want all employees to wear one, for their use.
In the linked article, public health workers are going to wear a cam so the govt can tell when they break rules, out in the field. I could see that kind of thinking expanded to other fields over time, no?
It occurs to me now that the cashier at hot topic is already being recorded. So good point.
kbin.life
Oldest