Information Commissioner Emily O'Reilly has ruled that the HSE must give a father access to his son's hospital records after it refused, primarily on the basis that a safety order had allegedly been granted against him.
The man's young son had been admitted to hospital in the mid- west as a result of an allergic reaction.
The boy lived with his mother but his father shared guardianship and custody. He sought access to his son's hospital records through the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act.
The HSE Mid West refused the request under a section of the FOI Act which allows for the refusal of access to information if it involves the disclosure of personal information.
However, that section also makes provision for parental access to a child's personal information if it is in the child's best interest.
In making her ruling, Ms O'Reilly referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment which found that a parent was entitled to a presumption that access to his child's medical information was in the child's best interests.
The Supreme Court said the presumption could be overcome if evidence was produced to show that releasing such information would not be in the child's best interests.
Ms O'Reilly said the HSE had not presented enough evidence to upset this presumption.
She said the HSE had continued to oppose the release of the information, despite the Supreme Court judgment.
In a letter to the man, Ms O'Reilly said the HSE refusal was "primarily on the basis of a safety order which, it says, was granted against you for five years from 3 March 2003".
She contacted the boy's mother, who indicated that the safety order was granted for her protection rather than that of her children.
The mother had been given an opportunity to make a submission during the Information Commissioner's review of the case but did not do so.
Ms O'Reilly ordered that the HSE decision be annulled and she granted the man's request for access to the records.
