The need to know versus the right to know: privacy of patient medical data in an information-based society

"Whatever, in connection with my professional practice, or not in connection with it, I see or hear, in the life of men, which ought not to be spoken of abroad, I will not divulge, as reckoning that all such should be kept secret."(1) "Safeguards to privacy in individual health care information are imperative to preserve the health care delivery relationship and the integrity of the patient record."(2) As early as the fourth and fifth centuries B.C., Hippocrates contemplated the importance of medical information to the care and treatment of patients. His oath suggests that privacy of a patient's medical information creates the foundation upon which a patient reposes trust in his or her physician. While defining the earliest version of the physician-patient privilege, the oath does not envision the extent of modern day access to healthcare information. A patient's relationship with the modern healthcare delivery system often includes a team of physicians, nurses, and other clinical support personnel. This relationship extends beyond direct caregivers and may include healthcare administrators, payor organizations, and persons unfamiliar with a patient's identity, such as researchers and public health officials. Accessing a patient's medical information links these participants to the patient's healthcare delivery relationship. The Hippocratic Oath does not contemplate such broad access, nor does it contemplate the emerging privacy crisis resulting from the application of computer technology to medical record storage and retrieval. The combination of broad access, individual privacy rights, and computer technology requires a rethinking of measures designed to protect the realities of the modern medical information society.     

The right to refuse treatment under Rogers v. Commissioner: preliminary empirical findings and comparisons

Preliminary findings on the effects of the Massachusetts ruling in Rogers v. Commissioner, an important right to refuse treatment case, are compared with models in other jurisdictions. In sum, few cases are reviewed; in almost all reviewed, the court overrides the patients' refusal. The case raises troubling implications about due process and quality of care.     

行政知情权的必要性及其价值的法理解析

行政知情权作为其他公民权利的前提性权利,是人民主权、控权理念与制度的内在逻辑,也是当今信息社会保障信息自由进而实现权力与权利均衡的必然要求。明确行政知情权的必要性与价值,加快相关立法,对于推进我国的民主、法治和宪政进程具有重大意义。