In late 2021 the NHS was preparing to give patients automatic online access to new entries in their GP records. That autumn, The BMJ ran a series of free webinars on patients’ access to their health records. I watched them closely, and they sharpened a view I still hold: holding back people’s access to information about their own bodies is a breach of medical ethics, not just a technical delay.

The ethical case

The BMJ framed its first webinar, in November 2021, as a question: why is failing to give patients timely access to their health records a failure of medical ethics? The panel looked at the ethical challenges, the common misconceptions, and the downsides people fear. It took on the objections you often hear: that patients will be harmed by what they read, that it will damage trust between patient and clinician, or that it will somehow reduce patients’ autonomy.

According to The BMJ’s listing for the recording, it was hosted by Henry Scowcroft of The BMJ. The presenters were Charlotte Blease of Harvard Medical School and Adam Hayden, a patient advocate. The panel was Hanife Rexhepi (University of Skövde), Alex Kafetz (Beamtree) and Harlan Krumholz (Yale University).

I find the case for access strong. It is your record, about you. Seeing it helps you spot mistakes, remember what was said, prepare for appointments and take part in decisions. Keeping it from you by default treats patients as people things are done to, rather than partners in their care. That is why I use the word “breach”: the principle is that patients can see their own information, and delay is a departure from it, not a neutral pause.

The barriers are real, though

The second webinar, on 17 November 2021, looked at the cultural and professional barriers. It was chaired by Emma Doble, Patient Editor at The BMJ, with Wajid Hussain, a consultant cardiac electrophysiologist and then the Royal College of Physicians’ clinical director for digital health, as the main presenter. The panel included Angela Coulter and Dr Mohammad Al-Ubaydli, founder of Patients Know Best.

These barriers deserve to be taken seriously, because they explain why change has been slow. The main ones discussed were:

  • Bad news without a clinician. People worry that patients will see a worrying test result before anyone has explained it to them. That raises hard questions about which results should appear, and when.
  • Professional liability. Clinicians worry about what it means for them if a patient is upset or misreads something.
  • Support in a stretched system. If patients do get difficult news online, who supports them, when services are already under pressure?
  • Extra demand. Practices fear a rise in calls from patients asking what an entry means.
  • Fairness. Not everyone has a smartphone, or the confidence to use online services, so access could widen gaps.

Some answers came up too. When a clinician orders a test, they can talk through the possible results up front, so nothing comes as a shock. Some medical schools were already teaching students how to work with patients who can read their full records.

The series went on to two more webinars: one on whether record access could widen health inequalities, and one on the bureaucratic, governance and legal barriers.

The point that stayed with me

One idea has stuck with me ever since. Whenever we agree to let a doctor or another service look at our GP record, we are giving consent. But how can we know what we are agreeing to share if we have never been able to see that record ourselves?

Real consent needs real access. That, more than anything, is why I think delaying access is hard to defend.

If you want to see your own GP record, my guide to seeing your GP health record explains how. If you look after someone else’s health, see proxy access.

Update, October 2026

  • Automatic access arrived, later than planned. It was first due to start on 1 November 2022, but that plan was dropped after concerns about safeguarding patients’ data. NHS England then made it a GP contract requirement: from 31 October 2023, practices had to give patients online access to new entries in their records, through the NHS App, unless the patient had opted out or an exception applied.
  • Uptake has grown fast. In its 2024/25 primary care update, NHS England reported that 84.1% of practices had switched on access to new record entries, up from about 21% in May 2023. In November 2025 alone, people viewed their GP health record in the NHS App 20.8 million times.
  • More is promised. The government’s 10 Year Health Plan (July 2025) promised a “single patient record” in the NHS App, bringing a person’s scattered records together. Full Fact reported in February 2026 that this was still in progress, with no delivery date set.