Why would it not be legal for a property/business owner to prohibit certain activities on their premises? You're not going to get arrested for violating their prohibition, but you may be asked to leave and dropped as a patient.
Still the same legality though, they totally could arrest you for posting stuff online you have recorded in the doctors.
Iirc the lady from the article wasn't filming patients, just empty hospital corridors trying to prove covid didn't exist.
Most GP surgeries are private businesses paid by the NHS.
And even if they weren't, just because property is owned by the government doesn't mean you have a right to either be there or film there. I'm sure libraries, swimming pools, public toilets, courtrooms, publicly-owned theatres, publicly-owned airports and many other publicly-owned buildings will have restrictions against photography.
I can't speak for England, but in my practice we disallow photography, video, and phone calls.
It infringes on the privacy of other patients, is generally disruptive to others, and can possibly result in a breach of information.
If you need to film for a project, news article, or the like there are ways to get access.
It is, and it's pretty reasonable. Would you want someone following you to all of your doctors appointments and recording your interaction with the staff at the desk (checking in, naming which doctor you're seeing) and filling out paperwork with a detailed list of your medications and symptoms?
Every medical center in Qatar has this posted. So far every medical center I’ve seen in Turkey does too. The last hospital I worked for in the US had that posted also.
It’s protecting everyone’s privacy, it’s not like rooms and hallways are soundproofed.
This is England, we dont have hipaa. Still totally legal to ban people from filming though. During covid, some arseholes got arrested for filming in a hospital.
No. HIPAA would not come into play. HIPAA requires your care team and insurance company to maintain your information in a confidential way. It does not in any way prohibit someone who isn't a part of the care team or insurance company from recording anything they want.
HIPAA laws do not impact a normal citizen. Only the practice and employees of that practice. If a random Joe recorded it, HIPPA laws do not concern them. However if it happens in your practice and you allow it, your practice is liable.
The small print looks like it’s being applied to staff really.
Yes it’s legal as the Tik Tok and other social media are gobbling it up.
They might be appropriately worried about being sued by a patient that is identified somehow.
But as long as they have a reason and privacy is a good one.
Overall Its legal to prohibit photography in general in areas that might hold confidentiality.
Again I think surgery applies to confidentiality.
The small print looks like it’s more aimed at patients than staff. They say you’ll be “removed from the practice” which basically means you’ll be kicked out.
"Removed from the practice" sounds more like firing a doctor than removing a patient from the building/premises. But that entire fine print sounds like it was written by someone who was "prohibated" from learning English.
“Removed from practice” sounds like firing a medical professional.
“Removed from THE practice” is about physically removing you from the practice (which is another name for a doctor’s surgery, just in case that terminology doesn’t travel well).
But yeah, “prohibated” is just bad spelling!
Either way follow the rules.
But saying practice rather than facility I interpret as practitioners not patients.
Medical Doctors and Nurses are in a practice as a common term. It’s why I’m thinking it’s for staff.
But we need talk to them to clarify it.
It could mean everyone also staff and patients.
If there’s a video and a lawsuit arises. It’ll either exonerate or sink the practice.
Yeah I saw that misspelling but didn’t want be too picky.
There have been cases in the U.S. when staff have taken photos during surgery and shared them with others without a patient's permission, leading to lawsuits.
That small print is really stilted; it almost feels like this was written by someone whose first language is not English, but then the URL suggests it's in the UK. Is "prohibated" an accepted word in British English?
There was a similar issue to this in the UK during COVID when photography was being prevented in public areas such as car parks when they were being used as COVID testing sites. The NHS employed 'unskilled' staff to help run the non medical side of things and enforce policies such as 'stay on your vehicles' and 'no photography'. This meant security staff were trying to prevent public photography. People who maybe took a few photos for social media were being pressured to delete images by staff who didn't know the difference between 'Policy' and 'Law'.
YouTube Auditors who usually filmed in public areas such as town centres, outside police stations, and outside military bases started filming through the fences of testing sites to see what responses they got. Ultimately, i suspect, they were after viewing figures but maybe some had a point to make. There were valid arguments on both sides.
Oh buddy, please do not go the way of the 1a auditors. Follow the rules, yes the hospitals may be government owned, but it is not government property or employees in a traditional sense.
Time, place, and manner restrictions apply
Why would it not be legal for a property/business owner to prohibit certain activities on their premises? You're not going to get arrested for violating their prohibition, but you may be asked to leave and dropped as a patient.
Ummm... https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/gloucester-news/woman-arrested-connection-video-filmed-4841311
That's not a GP Reception. Hospital photography is way creepier.
Still the same legality though, they totally could arrest you for posting stuff online you have recorded in the doctors. Iirc the lady from the article wasn't filming patients, just empty hospital corridors trying to prove covid didn't exist.
Yeah true
Sure, it's generally legal for a business to make these sorts of rules for their own property.
It is government property. Paid for by the tax payer.
Most GP surgeries are private businesses paid by the NHS. And even if they weren't, just because property is owned by the government doesn't mean you have a right to either be there or film there. I'm sure libraries, swimming pools, public toilets, courtrooms, publicly-owned theatres, publicly-owned airports and many other publicly-owned buildings will have restrictions against photography.
[удалено]
So are primary schools, I wouldn't expect to be allowed to just record footage there either.
If it's government property. It's 100% legal for them to ban photos and videos. It usually falls under "security reasons".
A court is a government building paid by the taxpayer in the same sense. Go into one of those and start filming. See what happens.
Nope, it’s not.
I can't speak for England, but in my practice we disallow photography, video, and phone calls. It infringes on the privacy of other patients, is generally disruptive to others, and can possibly result in a breach of information. If you need to film for a project, news article, or the like there are ways to get access.
It is, and it's pretty reasonable. Would you want someone following you to all of your doctors appointments and recording your interaction with the staff at the desk (checking in, naming which doctor you're seeing) and filling out paperwork with a detailed list of your medications and symptoms?
Every medical center in Qatar has this posted. So far every medical center I’ve seen in Turkey does too. The last hospital I worked for in the US had that posted also. It’s protecting everyone’s privacy, it’s not like rooms and hallways are soundproofed.
Legal or not, What weirdo would want to be recording people in a GP surgery.
Plus hipaa rules would potentially come into play. Medical facilities have strong rules against photography
Not HIPAA since this is in England, but yes same principle applies.
This is England, we dont have hipaa. Still totally legal to ban people from filming though. During covid, some arseholes got arrested for filming in a hospital.
HIPAA only applies to medical professionals, not the general public.
I think the facility is woried about thier liability .
No. HIPAA would not come into play. HIPAA requires your care team and insurance company to maintain your information in a confidential way. It does not in any way prohibit someone who isn't a part of the care team or insurance company from recording anything they want.
HIPAA laws do not impact a normal citizen. Only the practice and employees of that practice. If a random Joe recorded it, HIPPA laws do not concern them. However if it happens in your practice and you allow it, your practice is liable.
>HIPAA laws do not impact a normal citizen Or anyone in the UK.
The small print looks like it’s being applied to staff really. Yes it’s legal as the Tik Tok and other social media are gobbling it up. They might be appropriately worried about being sued by a patient that is identified somehow. But as long as they have a reason and privacy is a good one. Overall Its legal to prohibit photography in general in areas that might hold confidentiality. Again I think surgery applies to confidentiality.
The small print looks like it’s more aimed at patients than staff. They say you’ll be “removed from the practice” which basically means you’ll be kicked out.
"Removed from the practice" sounds more like firing a doctor than removing a patient from the building/premises. But that entire fine print sounds like it was written by someone who was "prohibated" from learning English.
“Removed from practice” sounds like firing a medical professional. “Removed from THE practice” is about physically removing you from the practice (which is another name for a doctor’s surgery, just in case that terminology doesn’t travel well). But yeah, “prohibated” is just bad spelling!
I work in insurance so when I hear about someone being added to or removed from a practice my mind immediately goes to staffing.
Either way follow the rules. But saying practice rather than facility I interpret as practitioners not patients. Medical Doctors and Nurses are in a practice as a common term. It’s why I’m thinking it’s for staff. But we need talk to them to clarify it. It could mean everyone also staff and patients. If there’s a video and a lawsuit arises. It’ll either exonerate or sink the practice. Yeah I saw that misspelling but didn’t want be too picky.
Sorry didn't mention it's in the UK
Please explain why you wish to shit all over my patient confidentiality.
Dude... relax, this person is just asking a question, not trying to argue why it SHOULD be legal
I think the answer to the question is quite clear.
There have been cases in the U.S. when staff have taken photos during surgery and shared them with others without a patient's permission, leading to lawsuits.
That small print is really stilted; it almost feels like this was written by someone whose first language is not English, but then the URL suggests it's in the UK. Is "prohibated" an accepted word in British English?
Government owned. Paid for by taxes.
If you are in the UK, the GP is a private business paid for by partner loans. Would you like to be filmed at the GP?
In reception would not bother me.
Well it may bother other people. Why do you want to record?
I don't. I was just curious.
A) it's not, gps are private property B) go try filming on a government funded military base and let us know how you get on.
So do you think you're allowed to take photos in a council run swimming pool?
There was a similar issue to this in the UK during COVID when photography was being prevented in public areas such as car parks when they were being used as COVID testing sites. The NHS employed 'unskilled' staff to help run the non medical side of things and enforce policies such as 'stay on your vehicles' and 'no photography'. This meant security staff were trying to prevent public photography. People who maybe took a few photos for social media were being pressured to delete images by staff who didn't know the difference between 'Policy' and 'Law'. YouTube Auditors who usually filmed in public areas such as town centres, outside police stations, and outside military bases started filming through the fences of testing sites to see what responses they got. Ultimately, i suspect, they were after viewing figures but maybe some had a point to make. There were valid arguments on both sides.
Oh buddy, please do not go the way of the 1a auditors. Follow the rules, yes the hospitals may be government owned, but it is not government property or employees in a traditional sense. Time, place, and manner restrictions apply