The municipal management in Skara has said that it is "good that it is being tried in court" regarding the Court of Appeal deciding whether it was right or wrong not to disclose information about infected or deceased relatives. Decisions are expected in one month at the earliest.
But the decision being tried does not apply to Vallehemmet, where the majority became infected and a third died, but to another accommodation with a few victims. According to experts, patient confidentiality is only relevant in a few cases. So if the municipality receives support in that case from the court - then it says nothing about whether it was right to keep the situation on the hard-hit Vallehemmet a secret.
SVT has spoken with the appellate court's administrator who believes that the only thing that can be read out of the decision is whether it was right not to disclose the information about the particular accommodation, to which the request applies, with reference to patient confidentiality.
If, on the other hand, the Court of Appeal were to decide that the municipality is obliged to disclose the information for the less affected home - well then it might be difficult to assert patient confidentiality for Vallehemmet.
Confidentiality is violated by IVOBut in practice, Skara's secrecy will probably be broken by a heavy and central authority in the next few days. The Health and Care Inspectorate has, as we have said, requested the names of Skara's two most affected homes no later than Friday 24 July.
- Yes, as it looks now, based on the information I have, we will make a confidentiality assessment, but they will probably be completely public, says Mari-Ann Larsen, unit manager at IVO to SVT.