患者隐私权和公共利益。

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW
MEDICINE AND LAW Pub Date : 2015-09-01
David A Frenkell, David M Wood
{"title":"患者隐私权和公共利益。","authors":"David A Frenkell,&nbsp;David M Wood","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The relationship between public interest and privacy is complex, particularly in healthcare. If public interest overrides the right to privacy, medical staff may be forced to break confidentiality beyond what is permitted by law. Should politicians be excluded from the definition of \"patients\" when confidentiality is concerned? Should that \"exclusion\" be broadened to include judges and other public figures, for example, leaders of industry? Would it not be reasonable to entrust a medical team, who may assess their health state and inform the public of their assessment without divulging private medical data? Nothing will prevent any person from revealing their own medical state to the public; nonetheless, it should be at their discretion. Once a person dies, his right to privacy of health information should be with his heirs. Voyeurism should not be elevated to become a tool for legalising violations of health confidentiality.</p>","PeriodicalId":54182,"journal":{"name":"MEDICINE AND LAW","volume":"34 1","pages":"285-296"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PATIENTS' RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND PUBLIC INTEREST.\",\"authors\":\"David A Frenkell,&nbsp;David M Wood\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The relationship between public interest and privacy is complex, particularly in healthcare. If public interest overrides the right to privacy, medical staff may be forced to break confidentiality beyond what is permitted by law. Should politicians be excluded from the definition of \\\"patients\\\" when confidentiality is concerned? Should that \\\"exclusion\\\" be broadened to include judges and other public figures, for example, leaders of industry? Would it not be reasonable to entrust a medical team, who may assess their health state and inform the public of their assessment without divulging private medical data? Nothing will prevent any person from revealing their own medical state to the public; nonetheless, it should be at their discretion. Once a person dies, his right to privacy of health information should be with his heirs. Voyeurism should not be elevated to become a tool for legalising violations of health confidentiality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MEDICINE AND LAW\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"285-296\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MEDICINE AND LAW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MEDICINE AND LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公共利益与隐私之间的关系很复杂,尤其是在医疗保健领域。如果公共利益高于隐私权,医务人员可能被迫超出法律允许的保密范围。当涉及到保密问题时,政治家是否应该被排除在“病人”的定义之外?这种“排除”是否应该扩大到包括法官和其他公众人物,例如行业领袖?委托一个医疗小组评估他们的健康状况,并在不泄露私人医疗数据的情况下将评估结果告知公众,这难道不合理吗?没有什么能阻止任何人向公众披露自己的健康状况;尽管如此,这应该由他们自己决定。一个人一旦死亡,他的健康信息隐私权应该属于他的继承人。偷窥不应被提升为将违反健康保密行为合法化的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
PATIENTS' RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND PUBLIC INTEREST.

The relationship between public interest and privacy is complex, particularly in healthcare. If public interest overrides the right to privacy, medical staff may be forced to break confidentiality beyond what is permitted by law. Should politicians be excluded from the definition of "patients" when confidentiality is concerned? Should that "exclusion" be broadened to include judges and other public figures, for example, leaders of industry? Would it not be reasonable to entrust a medical team, who may assess their health state and inform the public of their assessment without divulging private medical data? Nothing will prevent any person from revealing their own medical state to the public; nonetheless, it should be at their discretion. Once a person dies, his right to privacy of health information should be with his heirs. Voyeurism should not be elevated to become a tool for legalising violations of health confidentiality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信