On 17 January 2018, 18 people gathered at Friends’ Meeting House in Manchester and began a three-day “citizens’ jury”. The task for these citizens was to tackle a set of jury questions. The questions were designed to test a number of scenarios where patient data could be shared. In each case, the participants were asked to judge whether it was reasonable for a patient to expect the information to be shared, or whether it was reasonable for the patient to expect privacy.
Over the three days, the citizens heard from, and asked questions of, expert witnesses, and worked in groups on the jury questions. They reached conclusions together, and were polled on their individual views. Together they identified reasons to expect information to be shared and reasons to expect privacy. Those reasons (effectively criteria) were then tested against two case studies.
This report explains why the jury was carried out, how it was designed, what the jurors did, and the jury results.