September 28, 2020

The Editor Speaks: Human Rights question need for mandatory cancer law

0
0



Pin It

Colin Wilson2webIt is well known that my feelings are 100% against the MANDATORY cancer bill because there is absolutely no need for it to be mandatory.

It is a disgrace that the Cancer Society and the government have not once conducted a survey of actual cancer sufferers and to get their views on being forced to be named on a cancer registry.

Cancer patients are the ones that supposedly benefits from this registry and surely it is up tonthese patients to decide if they want their names to be placed on it.

I can see no justification why cancer patients have to be named anyway. It is like these patients have some communicable disease and should be walking around with a bell they have to shake shouting “unclean” at the top of their voices.

As for the so called ‘secrecy’ the government and the Cancer Society have been heralding I just don’t believe it. Perhaps they are not aware of all the cyber attacks recently on even the US Pentagon websites let alone all the so called ‘secured’ information the retail shops have on your personal data that have been compromised by just a few young jerks with a computer.

Now thank goodness James Austin-Smith, Chair of the Cayman Islands Human Rights Commission has asked why the Cancer Law requires so much data.

Please see iNews Cayman story today “Cayman Islands HRC has many concerns regarding new Cancer Law”.

“Of most concern to the Commission is the apparent lack of proportionality in the data which is required to be submitted:

“Schedule 2
(1) Every report shall contain the following data –
(a) the full name and business address of the person or persons who carried out the test to which this report relates;
(b) the full name and business address of the medical doctor, dentist or examiner
who requested the test;
(c) in relation to the person on whom the test was carried out –
(i) name, alias or any other names that he is known by or may have been known by;
(ii) date of birth;
(iii) gender; (iv) ethnicity;
(v) full address, including the mailing address;
(vi) occupation;
(vii) nationality; and
(viii) length of residence in the Islands;”

Can the perpetrators of this New Cancer Bill explain to me how knowing all the above information is going to help them with their cancer?

The Human Rights have asked exactly the same question.

The Cancer Society made the claim that the UK has similar Cancer legislation without saying “IT ALLOWS INDIVIDUALS TO OPT OUT OF PROVIDING INFORMATION TO BE REPORTED”.

Now why did they decide to leave that out?

Thank you Mr Austen-Smith. Finally there is a voice with some real weight on my side of the fence.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Speak Your Mind

*