Doctors could face increased legal liability if they join the Federal Government’s $500 million personally controlled e-health scheme.

Medical defence groups have warned in submissions to the Senate Community Affairs Committee inquiry into the new scheme of dangers from inaccurate, out-of-date information and privacy concerns.

The personally controlled e-health scheme legislation would give patients control and access to their own electronic medical records and is expected to become law by the middle of next year.

However, there is another chain of responsibility with the “system operator” at the top (the health secretary), through to “nominated representatives” and “authorised representatives”.

The Insurance Council of Australia’s brief submission asks for further clarification about the meaning and roles of the various positions mentioned in the legislation.

Australia’s largest medical defence organisation Avant Mutual calls for limited immunity from civil liability for whoever is managing the health records – probably a general practitioner (GP) – where the provider is acting in good faith.

“A major disincentive, in Avant’s view, to a GP agreeing to accept this critical role is the potential for increased legal liability,” it says in its submission.

“As the information is shared, there is an increase in the potential liability risk to the nominated provider if the information relied on by other health professionals is inaccurate or out of date.

“Given that the GP is not in control of the information that may be included in or excluded from the system, maintaining the shared summary may be a difficult and time-consuming task.”

Rival medical defence organisation MDA National warns the quality of the medical records will depend on the information provided by the patient.

It says there is no capacity in the proposed legislation for a healthcare provider to withhold information from a patient when they believe it could pose a “serious threat to the life or health of any person, including the patient, practitioner or other patients”.

There is also an issue with the potential disclosure of medical information to courts without regard to the consequences to a patient of the disclosure, MDA says.

The proposed legislation allows the “system operator” to disclose information to courts and tribunals.

“The nominated provider should be consulted first to enable the health practitioner to form a clinical view regarding the impact of the release of information on the patient or others,” the MDA submission says.

“We consider the subpoena to produce records should be directed to the patient or nominated provider, not the service operator.”