# Attestation 'Request'
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391
**Category:** RM
**Created:** [16 March 2021 10:21 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391 "2021-03-16T10:21:12Z")
**Posts on this page:** 10
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@VeraPrinsen](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/VeraPrinsen)
#### Post date: [16 March 2021 10:21 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/1 "2021-03-16T10:21:12Z")
Hi! We are looking at using Attestations and have a question about the following:
> **[Common Information Model](https://specifications.openehr.org/releases/RM/latest/common.html#_attestation)**
>
> openEHR Common Information Model specification
> When an attestation is required, the most common scenario will be that a Composition Version will be committed with a commit\_audit of type ATTESTATION, rather than just AUDIT\_DETAILS; the is\_pending flag will be set to True to indicate that the committed information needs to be signed by another person.
So if I understand this correctly the committer of this first ATTESTATION is the person that made the change to the Composition. And another ATTESTATION object needs to be added to the Composition Version to finish the Attestation.
And our question about this is: Is there a way to indicate who needs to sign it with a second Attestation object as sort of a request instead of it just being an open Attestation?
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [16 March 2021 11:00 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/2 "2021-03-16T11:00:17Z")
> [@VeraPrinsen](#):
>
> And our question about this is: Is there a way to indicate who needs to sign it with a second Attestation object as sort of a request instead of it just being an open Attestation?
At the moment there is not. There is probably an argument for adding a ‘signer’ or ‘awaiting\_signer’ field that indicates - a name (Dr Sara Bergman)? and/or a role type (surgeon)? Something else? @siljelb , @ian.mcnicoll , @heather.leslie & other clinical modelling specialists may have opinions to offer.
---
### Author:  [@siljelb](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/siljelb)
#### Post date: [16 March 2021 14:15 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/3 "2021-03-16T14:15:58Z")
I know this kind of “awaiting signing” flag is used in some EHR implementations, but I don’t know the details. Maybe implementers such as DIPS (ping @bna) could elaborate?
---
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [16 March 2021 14:33 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/4 "2021-03-16T14:33:05Z")
Now that I think of it, @sebastian.iancu may know about this, since Code24 systems are used extensively in mental health where I believe attestation occurs more often.
---
### Author:  [@bna](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/bna)
#### Post date: [16 March 2021 19:43 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/5 "2021-03-16T19:43:17Z")
Yes we have several workflow options for documents in the legacy system. These are essential for the usage of the EHR. Since it was present before we introduced openehr into the system we never used any openehr related features for this.
---
### Author:  [@sebastian.iancu](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/sebastian.iancu)
#### Post date: [19 March 2021 14:45 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/6 "2021-03-19T14:45:15Z")
Indeed we may had similar requirements. It relates to Patient consent, but we did not implemented with ATTESTATION (due to some internal technical choices), but as ADMIN\_ENTRY compositions and the use of LINKs & FOLDERs.
---
### Author:  [@VeraPrinsen](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/VeraPrinsen)
#### Post date: [24 March 2021 10:25 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/7 "2021-03-24T10:25:24Z")
Thank you for all your replies. We will see if we will implement it in another way for now then and will curiously await to see if something will be added to the specifications.
---
### Author:  [@ian.mcnicoll](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/ian.mcnicoll)
#### Post date: [24 March 2021 10:40 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/8 "2021-03-24T10:40:45Z")
The simple solution if you do not need to ‘park’ a verison if the composition until formal attestation, is just to add the name of the attester/signatory as a parcticipant with the role ’ key signatory /attester etc. We have done something like for and Endo life Care wishes form where.
You can add a list of participants to any COMPOSITION or any ENTRY.
This is a bit ‘softer’ then formal versioned Attestation but was enough for us.
---
### Author:  [@OscarKarlsson](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/OscarKarlsson)
#### Post date: [24 April 2025 07:01 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/9 "2025-04-24T07:01:55Z")
Hello!
Is there any update on how and where to capture ‘signer’? 🙂
---
### Author:  [@erik.sundvall](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/erik.sundvall)
#### Post date: [12 May 2026 12:26 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/attestation-request/1391/10 "2026-05-12T12:26:46Z")
@OscarKarlsson you meant awaiting/intended signer, right?
Does anybody have any feedback regarding if @ian.mcnicoll’s suggestion of adding the awaiting/intended signer among in the EVENT\_CONTEXT.participations list is recommended?
What about interpretation of “ATTESTATION.committer” property when combined with the ATTESTATION .is\_pending flag? Is committer then the persion that is supposed to sign later, or the one that happened to store this COMPOSITON last (in unattested from)?
//Erik