Using Mobile phone only to log in to Doctor

[Michael Hodgson]

10 hours ago, woodenhead said:

 (but they wouldn't listen to me or their daughter).

 

That's in-laws for you.

[Nick C]

14 hours ago, Reorte said:

It's nothing to do with paranoia. I don't fear misuse of them, but ID cards are a seriously, seriously messed-up concept.

I don't get that - if you're not worried about misuse, what possible objection can you have to having a consistent, secure means of proving who you are? 

 

It's got nothing to do with treating people as criminals, and more about consistency for proving that you're old enough to drink, able to vote, who you are to the bank, and so on.

 

Mrs C has one, as she's a citizen of an EU country. She finds it utterly baffling that in this country we can 'prove' our identity to banks etc using something so easily forged as a utility bill...

[phil-b259]

6 minutes ago, Nick C said:

 

Mrs C has one, as she's a citizen of an EU country. She finds it utterly baffling that in this country we can 'prove' our identity to banks etc using something so easily forged as a utility bill...

Indeed - going through the process of buying a house a president and virtually everyone requires us to use Passports / driving licences in a specialist anti-money laundering app* on the phone.

 

God knows how people without that or a photo card driving licence would do it….
 

* which compares them to a selfie you take there and then plus reads the biometric data from the chip in the passport too. 

[Reorte]

11 minutes ago, Nick C said:

I don't get that - if you're not worried about misuse, what possible objection can you have to having a consistent, secure means of proving who you are?

 

You don't get that someone could simply find the whole concept fundamentally disagreeable?

 

I see this quite often, people often not understanding any dislike (or like) that they don't actually share, and insist on an argument that would turn them around to agreeing in order to understand. Is empathy really that difficult? Note empathy and sympathy are very different things.

Edited March 18 by Reorte

[Nick C]

4 minutes ago, Reorte said:

I have a problem with the whole idea of having to prove who you are being seen as an ordinary, everyday part of life.

 

Is it so hard to understand why someone would find the idea fundamentally distasteful?

 

I've noticed quite often that people seem to often find it a bit confusing whenever someone isn't keen on something but it's not because of practical considerations, and I do find that a little strange. There's a lot more to life than practical convenience!

 

I understand your distaste, but I think you're directing it at the wrong thing.

 

The need to prove who you are is already totally ingrained into our society, with many things you cannot do unless you have an appropriate way of demonstrating that you're entitled to them (e.g. driving, travelling to other countries, accessing the money in your bank account, gaining entry into certain places, and so on). We have passports, driving licences, "proof of age" cards, credit cards, company IDs, and so on and so forth. Whether for better or for worse, modern western society simply wouldn't work without people being able to prove who they are - we simply have too many people.

 

The presence or absence of ID cards doesn't change that, they are simply a way of proving who you are, not the reason for it.

[Reorte]

5 minutes ago, Nick C said:

I understand your distaste, but I think you're directing it at the wrong thing.

 

The need to prove who you are is already totally ingrained into our society, with many things you cannot do unless you have an appropriate way of demonstrating that you're entitled to them (e.g. driving, travelling to other countries, accessing the money in your bank account, gaining entry into certain places, and so on). We have passports, driving licences, "proof of age" cards, credit cards, company IDs, and so on and so forth. Whether for better or for worse, modern western society simply wouldn't work without people being able to prove who they are - we simply have too many people.

 

The presence or absence of ID cards doesn't change that, they are simply a way of proving who you are, not the reason for it.

You think I like any of that lot either? I very much don't, and thus I'm not at all keen on moves that shift even further in that direction, rather than trying to wind them back as much as possible. I know the reasons for them, why we've shifted like that, and it often feels like another example of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

 

I also find the dislike of the potential hassle we've got currently, which doesn't involve anything you're compelled to have, less than my dislike of the concept of ID cards.

[ian]

Anyway, back at the topic...

 

EMIS replied to my support request saying that the change to 2FA had been mandadated by the NHS (OK, but not actually the subject of the complaint), had been notified to the surgeries in advance (albeit by only a few hours, but still not the main issue) and that if you wish to use a land line for the 2FA process...

...drum roll please...

...you need to use the NHS login option.

 

This requres setting up another account, this time with the NHS, which has to be verified (according to the sign up screen this may take some time due to pressure of work).

 

So for me it is BOTTOMS - Back on to the old manual system.

 

When I picked up my last prescription I immediately dropped the repeat prescription slip in the box, along with a note explaining why, and will carry on doing it that way. They can have the order cluttering up the pharmacy fridge and reception shelves from now on.

Edited March 19 by ian

[jjb1970]

My objection to ID cards is not to the principle of the things, but how they tend to be sold. 

 

I have an ID card, it is very convenient for many things, and can make life easier. Actually,  Singapore has moved past ID cards and it is now a digital ID based on the Singpass app.

 

So far so good. However, advocates tend to make inflated claims about fighting crime, terrorism and generally undesirable things which are highly questionable. There is one former PM who appears regularly to claim any bad event shows why we should have ID cards. ID cards are convenient and in reality just give a single codified alternative to the existing de-facto ID documents for domestic use (passport, photocard driving license), but they don't stop crime, terrorism or anything else. 

 

And something that makes me cringe is the 'if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about' argument. Whenever that argument is used my instinctive reaction is scepticism.

[franciswilliamwebb]

16 hours ago, ian said:

Anyway, back at the topic...

 

Oh no you don't, Sonny-Jim, you'll not be getting away with that any time soon! 😉

[Reorte]

3 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

My objection to ID cards is not to the principle of the things, but how they tend to be sold. 

 

I have an ID card, it is very convenient for many things, and can make life easier. Actually,  Singapore has moved past ID cards and it is now a digital ID based on the Singpass app.

Does that mean you're not allowed to not have a mobile there?

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

And something that makes me cringe is the 'if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about' argument. Whenever that argument is used my instinctive reaction is scepticism.

 

Scepticism is fine - but I have yet to see a reasoned argument, or a quoted case, which shows the above pro-card argument to be a fallacy.

 

Bring 'em on, I say!

 

CJI.

[Reorte]

If you've got nothing to hide - then it's absolutely no-one else's business to know about it. Nothing to hide, nothing to prove.

[phil-b259]

21 hours ago, ian said:

 

So for me it is BOTTOMS - Back on to the old manual system.

 

When I picked up my last prescription I immediately dropped the repeat prescription slip in the box, along with a note explaining why, and will carry on doing it that way. They can have the order cluttering up the pharmacy fridge and reception shelves from now on.

 

Which is all very well until your repeat prescription is not issued because you have not gone through what in now considered the 'correct approval process'

 

It would be something of a pryic victory if your refusal to change how you do things only ends up having a negative effect on your health.

[phil-b259]

3 hours ago, Reorte said:

Does that mean you're not allowed to not have a mobile there?

 

Or maybe just that if you have a phone with said app on it then you no longer have to carry round a physical ID card.

 

In other words its a physical ID card or a phone (fully charged up and able to open the required app) is required for compliance with the law.

 

Also given mobile phones are equipped with security measures like requiring a face scan, a fingerprint or a numerical pass key to be entered before a user can do anything then in actual fact they are a far more secure way of  carrying your ID around!

 

Thats because if its stolen then (1) the theif will not be able to get access to the ID app and (2) if you have registered your device with your network provider than they can send out a 'kill device' message which immediately turns the device into a worthless paperweight once it has logged onto a mobile phone mast.

 

If a thief makes off with a physical ID card by contrast there is no way being able to obscure / destroy the information printed on it.

Edited March 19 by phil-b259

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Reorte said:

If you've got nothing to hide - then it's absolutely no-one else's business to know about it. Nothing to hide, nothing to prove.

 

Here we go again - I thought that we'd both agreed to leave this alone!

 

Identifying oneself has nothing whatsoever to do with proof - an alibi can be proof of innocence, but not the mere act of producing a document to identify oneself.

 

It is impossible in the present world to exist without a means of identifying oneself - a variety of means of doing this currently being required.

 

It is simply far more efficient for both citizen and authority if a single, universal document is used.

 

Nothing to be frightened of!

 

CJI.

[melmerby]

23 hours ago, ian said:

When I picked up my last prescription I immediately dropped the repeat prescription slip in the box,

Our prescriptions are sent electronically to the pharmacy which is not in the same place as the GP surgery.

[Reorte]

32 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Here we go again - I thought that we'd both agreed to leave this alone!

 

...

 

Nothing to be frightened of!

In which case all I'll point out is that I'm not frightened of it, I simply loathe it.

[ian]

4 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Which is all very well until your repeat prescription is not issued because you have not gone through what in now considered the 'correct approval process'

 

It would be something of a pryic victory if your refusal to change how you do things only ends up having a negative effect on your health.

Our surgery is also a dispensary. The doctor likes it that way beacuse the practice makes more money. They point blank refuse to have any truck with electronic prescriptions to third parties - if you want a paper prescription you have to go in and collect it.

 

Things issued by the pharmacy come, where appropriate, with a repeat prescription slip request slip to be returned to the surgery. The on-line system simply offered an alternative on-line request form.

 

 

Edited March 19 by ian

[phil-b259]

6 minutes ago, ian said:

Our surgery is also a dispensary. The doctor likes it that way beacuse the practice makes more money. They point blank refuse to have any truck with electronic prescriptions to third parties - if you want a paper prescription you have to go in and collect it.

 

Things issued by the pharmacy come, where appropriate, with a repeat prescription slip request slip to be returned to the surgery. The on-line system simply offered an alternative on-line request form.

 

 

 

That in itself is surprising given the many initiatives being pushed out by the NHS / Whitehall to widen access to services, promote competition and give pharmacists a more active role in the healthcare process.

 

Certanly requiring to attend the surgery to pick up a prescription or the necessary medication would be incredibly frustrating (not to mention downright inconvenient) for those whose work / childcare patterns rule it out as a viable option...

[ian]

54 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Certanly requiring to attend the surgery to pick up a prescription or the necessary medication would be incredibly frustrating (not to mention downright inconvenient) for those whose work / childcare patterns rule it out as a viable option...

 

This is Shropshire. The powers that be (various) don't do things for your benefit, only theirs.

[Metr0Land]

16 hours ago, melmerby said:

Our prescriptions are sent electronically to the pharmacy which is not in the same place as the GP surgery.

 

Our surgery faxes them to local surgeries and/or waits for the pharmacy to come and collect physical prescriptions.  West Wales isn't known for rushing into things!

[APOLLO]

We have our own passports in Wigan !!

 

 

As to ID, why ? - I know who I am !! (everyone else can sod off !!).

 

Brit15

[melmerby]

I've been thinking about this.

Is there any reason why I can't use wifi to log onto the website  and then receive an SMS via the 4G to the phone and enter that whilst logged on via the wifi?

That way I wouldn't be using minutes from my mobile account each time I log on the surgery website.

[jjb1970]

On 19/03/2024 at 21:29, Reorte said:

Does that mean you're not allowed to not have a mobile there?

 

Apologies,  I  missed  this question. 

 

No, mobile phones are not mandatory. If you don't have a phone you still have a digital ID and can access it via the Internet using PCs or tablets. In extremis the ID card has a 3D bar code linked to the system, which allows government officials to check details. For those determined to avoid phones and PCs there are measures to facilitate  ID checks but mobile phone penetration here is so high (I think it's about 97%) that it's  reasonable for government to base things on the fact that an overwhelming majority have a phone and to make provision for the tiny minority who don't. 

[Jeremy Cumberland]

8 hours ago, melmerby said:

I've been thinking about this.

Is there any reason why I can't use wifi to log onto the website  and then receive an SMS via the 4G to the phone and enter that whilst logged on via the wifi?

That way I wouldn't be using minutes from my mobile account each time I log on the surgery website.

I assumed from your earlier posts that you didn't have a mobile phone and so couldn't receive the authentication code via SMS.

 

Unless the surgury requires you to use their app (which isn't mentioned in your original post), I don't see why you shouldn't just continue using your computer as you had done in the past, registering your mobile number to reveive the authentication code via SMS, and copying this into your web browser.

 

It wouldn't work for me, because I don't have a mobile phone.