{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012965964343598054, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.0588235294117645, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Patients' Rights of Access to their Health Records

This article examines differing judicial attitudes to common law rights of access to health records in three jurisdictions. It argues that these serve as an indicator of judicial commitment to the concept of patient self-determination. It suggests that the common law in England and Wales and Australia is out of step with an openness beginning to pervade health care and discusses why this might be so. Finally, the Canadian fiduciary model of the doctor-patient relationship is applauded for reconciling patient autonomy with the beneficient practice of medicine.