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

Suffolk University law review Pub Date : 1997-01-01
R E Harris
{"title":"The need to know versus the right to know: privacy of patient medical data in an information-based society.","authors":"R E Harris","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>\"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.</p>","PeriodicalId":82862,"journal":{"name":"Suffolk University law review","volume":"30 4","pages":"1183-218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Suffolk University law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

"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.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
了解的需要与知情权:信息社会中患者医疗数据的隐私。
“无论什么,与我的专业实践有关,或者与它无关,我在人们的生活中看到或听到的,不应该在国外谈论的,我不会泄露,因为我认为所有这些都应该保密。”“保护个人医疗信息的隐私对于维护医疗服务关系和患者记录的完整性是必不可少的。”(2)早在公元前4世纪和5世纪,希波克拉底就考虑到了医疗信息对患者护理和治疗的重要性。他的誓言表明,病人医疗信息的隐私是病人信任他或她的医生的基础。虽然定义了最早版本的医患特权,但誓词并没有预见到现代医疗保健信息获取的程度。患者与现代医疗保健服务系统的关系通常包括医生、护士和其他临床支持人员的团队。这种关系超出了直接护理人员的范围,可能包括医疗保健管理人员、付款组织和不熟悉患者身份的人员,如研究人员和公共卫生官员。访问患者的医疗信息将这些参与者链接到患者的医疗保健交付关系。希波克拉底誓言没有考虑到如此广泛的访问,也没有考虑到计算机技术在医疗记录存储和检索中的应用所导致的新出现的隐私危机。广泛访问、个人隐私权和计算机技术的结合要求我们重新考虑旨在保护现代医疗信息社会现实的措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Planning for Law as a Career and an Enterprise Making Law with Lawsuits: Understanding Judicial Review in Campaign Finance Policy Promise and Private Law The Communist Party & the Law: An Outline of Formal and Less Formal Linkages between the Ruling Party and the Other Legal Institutions in the People's Republic of China Bearing False Witness: Perjured Affidavits and the Fourth Amendment
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1