[to11mtm]

> I can only imagine the horror felt by the people whose therapy notes were made public.

I might be in the minority here, but frankly I'd be -happy- to actually be able to see a therapist's notes on me. At least in my region, one of the first things you sign before any therapy begins usually contains a paragraph that such notes are 'IP' of the therapist/provider and thus something you as a patient are never allowed to see.

[closewith]

In the EU, at least, you have a right to all information that a healthcare provider holds about you, so either an administrative request or data subject access request will get you that data for free, and without the possibility of it being used against you by third parties.

[retrac]

There is such a right where I live too, but there is an exception: when the release of that information is thought to be harmful to that individual. I can certainly imagine how allowing a paranoid person suffering from delusion, to read the unfiltered medical notes of their psychiatrist, could be quite harmful. I don't know how often this actually comes up; I read the report of the last psychiatrist I saw in its entirety. They always suggest you shouldn't. Probably right about that. "Subdued affect"? Ouch.

[Sharlin]

Why is “subdued affect” ouch? Just about anyone who’s depressed or just melancholic has a “subdued affect”.

[cvalka]

In what universe would any client agree to this predatory arrangement?

[nibbleshifter]

Apparently, America.

[this_steve_j]

There appears to be an excluded middle scenario that you are in fact describing, wherein a patient would be happy to peer behind the curtain at the doctor’s notepad for their own session (but not everyone else’s).

Fewer patients would be happy to see the doctor’s notes for all other patients including themselves.

Fewer still would appreciate having everyone, including non-patients, see not only their notes but all of the other patients in that practice.

[Sharlin]

Where I’m from we don’t even have to sign anything before therapy begins… much less some weird IP clause. And as another commenter said, such a clause would be invalid anyway.

[MidnightBullet]

Sounds like something that would break GDPR