But they didn't did they. They got what St James Palace released in a press release for the entire world to digest and it seem comment on.
You and others it seems are going by what ifs and could have beens.
Yes it's unfortunate that this nurse decided to end her life, maybe the fact she did it a day after she answered the phone at five-thirty in the morning is just as happy a coincidence, yes it may have been the straw that broke the camels back, but I find it hard to believe that this sole event caused her to allegedly kill herself.
My original point and I'll stand by this. The radio broadcasters do not deserve to be fired, nor sued as was suggested. Yes it was a questionable act, but it seems the ethics board/lawyer at 2Dayfm signed off on the phone call, it didn't breach any laws, here nor in Australia. All in all, in my opinion, no one did anything wrong here. If it was any other "celeb" say Victoria Beckham, I'm sure there would be some grumblings about press invasion from certain aspects of the news media, but not to the extent that's happened here and the majority of opinion would be, meh.
These types of phone calls have happened, I'm sure Tony Blair or Gordon Brown were at the receiving end of one years ago and there certainly wasn't the righteousness over it that has occurred here.
but we've already established that they did break the law. But even if they hadn't, they brought a lot of condemnation and bad press on thier employers, people have been fired for a lot less
Which law? The information was in the public domain, so are you saying that we are breaking the law by actually discussing this? I admit, yes it's rather ethically interesting, but breaking a law, not so much.
Last time I read the BBC regarding this story, no complaints had been issued to the hospital and what happened, not from St. James Palace, not from the Queen or Phil the Greek, not even from the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. From all accounts, they were perfectly happy with the way Kate was treated in hospital, yes there will be an investigation, but they happen at the drop of a hat. It's just arm chair quarter backs complaining and moaning when the people actually involved have done no complaining and it's trial by interwebz for the two radio broadcasters who have really done nothing wrong.
You've shared aspects of your personal medical history online here before. So, judging by your comments above, if you were admitted to the hospital, and I contacted them falsely posing as a member of your family in order to gain personal medical information, as long as I didn't learn anything more than what you've shared here online, it's perfectly okay and legal for me to do that?
Please tell me you recognize the significant difference between the family choosing
to release personal medical information on their own through the St. James Palace press release, and radio DJs using false pretenses to try and gain access to that information and more from the hospital without permission?
The fact that they were supposedly unsuccessful in gaining more information than was provided in the press release (and all we have to go on that is your word, since the article says they got "detailed information" which could imply they got more than what was in the release) doesn't negate the fact that they tried
to gain more information and did so using fraudulent identification; any more than someone trying to commit murder and failing to do so doesn't negate the fact that they tried (and no, I'm not comparing it to anything that serious; just using an example).
I'm not saying they need to be arrested or anything so drastic, but suspension, termination, or a fine would be in order, and I certainly would fire the lawyers who approved the prank going on the air. I don't know the exact legal details in Australia (though I would think patient privacy laws cover this there as well), but it would surely seem to run afoul of patient privacy laws in the UK where the call was received (and it would violate HIPAA law in the US as well had it happened here). I would think it would constitute fraud or something similar as well.
Obviously, the hospital needs to review its policies as well (and the article suggests it is), since the nurse should have never released information over the phone based on the recognition of a voice alone without further confirmation of identification. Clearly the nurse was a bit starstruck. Her recognition of this and possible guilt and thinking it might affect her job could have been one of many contributing factors in her committing suicide. Obviously there had to be a lot more at play there for her to kill herself and the DJs could not have known that would happen, but they should have known she could have potentially been fired or suspended from work for this, and regardless of the consequences it was still very wrong for them to do.