Journal of Law and Medicine最新文献

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) restates human rights through the lens of disability. One of the key rights relates to equality before the law. This has been interpreted as requiring the abolition of substitute decision-making regimes. As a signatory, Australia has agreed to implement the rights set out in the CRPD. In Australia, the laws relating to substitute decision-making and legal capacity vary from State to State. This article examines how the laws in Victoria compare to Australia's CRPD obligations and, hence, whether Victoria is compliant with or in breach of the CRPD. It concludes that, while on the surface Victoria is in breach of Australia's CRPD obligations, Victorian legislation is making significant efforts to operationalise a human rights approach to decision-making.

The rising cost of private health insurance and constraints within public health systems are global concerns. Genetic testing presents a transformative opportunity for health care to enhance health outcomes and optimise resource allocation through personalised medicine, early diagnosis, targeted treatments, managed care, and improved drug development. However, ethical and policy issues arise, including privacy, discrimination and equitable access to testing. Balancing these against potential health benefits poses a complex challenge. While some advocate for restricting health insurers from using genetic data, others argue that well-regulated private insurance can ensure affordability, improved health outcomes, and innovative care adoption. This article explores examples of improved health outcomes through genetic testing, identifies areas of risk related to insurers' use of genetic data, evaluates the adequacy of New Zealand's legal framework, and emphasises the need for ethical and equitable policy solutions. The broader issues of data governance, biases in algorithms, and implications of artificial intelligence and machine learning warrant separate exploration.

At the time the COVID-19 pandemic was declared there was no vaccine and other medical products were insufficient to meet demands. At the time intellectual property was considered a limitation to an effective pandemic response and the World Trade Organization considered a waiver of intellectual property addressed by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The lesson from the COVID-19 pandemic and TRIPS waiver is that given enough time sufficient medical products will be delivered, albeit there remain some complicated delivery challenges and vaccine hesitancy issues. This column addresses the moment before that medical product saturation and the inherent limitation imposed by industry policies. The column concludes that the private sectors' motivating factors need to be integrated into the design of global public health pandemic responses from the start.

There is an increasing demand for the return of raw genomic data by research participants in translational genomic research. This article discusses the scope and application of privacy and freedom of information legislative provisions in Australia. Whether there is a right to access a copy of such data under Australian privacy legislation is contingent on whether raw genomic data can identify an individual and this article explores the opportunities for genomic data to be linked to individuals. We conclude that despite the complexity and overlapping nature of privacy laws in Australia, there is a clear right on the part of research participants to access their raw genomic data.

Advance Care Planning (ACP) relates to the process of thinking about, discussing, and potentially documenting future wishes and preferences relating to personal and health matters. Existing literature has explored ACP from the perspective of health care professionals and older people. However, data exploring the broader process of Advance Personal Planning (APP), which also accounts for plans relating to legal and financial matters, are limited. This article reports on an interview study that explored barriers to APP engagement, factors influencing the quality and future use of instruments, and opportunities for improving APP processes for older adults from the perspectives of key informants working in the fields of law, health, and aged care. Data were coded in NVivo and analysed thematically. Opportunities for improvement include education, normalising conversations, integration into usual practice, and reform. Recommendations are made at professional, community, and structural levels, with the aim of improving APP outcomes for all involved.

Given the absence of a civil damages action for personal injury in New Zealand, its Health and Disability Commissioner's (HDC) complaints process occupies a pivotal role in its medico-legal arrangements. Much hope was invested in it, but as currently configured, the regime is incapable of delivering justice or fulfilling its legislative purpose in a good number of cases. Many hundreds of complaints per annum, in which there is a strongly arguable case of deficient conduct or more than a mild departure from acceptable standards and in which a serious outcome has resulted, are not fully investigated; and there is no mechanism to appeal an adverse HDC decision that a party considers substantively unfair. Recent criticism of these issues by courts, the Chief Ombudsman, and commentators has mounted, and a petition to Parliament seeking legislative reform to create a right to appeal from adverse HDC decisions resulted in referral of the issue to the Commissioner to consider in an upcoming review, but hoped-for reform will not happen quickly.

This column explores how the law might support interdisciplinary collaboration in research and practice in the mental health sector. It provides an overview of the Victorian Collaborative Centre for Mental Health and Wellbeing which was established by statute to support collaboration across multiple disciplines and services for the benefit of mental health consumers. It suggests that interdisciplinary collaboration, which has the lived experience and knowledge of mental health consumers at its heart, has the potential for transformative and beneficial systemic change.

In recent years legal rules to regulate causes of death have begun to appear. One example of this relates to the term "excited delirium" which has been subject to challenge by medical and legal professionals. Human rights activists have pushed against its usage by law enforcement and medical death investigators. The passing of the California Assembly Bill 360 restricting the use of the term is an example of this. Legislatively mandating, or banning causes of death poses an interesting challenge for death investigators. The lack of uniform guidance on how deaths should be classified across different jurisdictions and the variations in linguistic and causation-based language in cause of death statements may have influenced this development. Legislation that seeks to enforce ways of documenting the cause of a death, which is in effect an expert medical opinion, presents significant future challenges in expert testimony.

This article argues the voice of people with dementia was missing from the Australian Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety (RCAC) Final Report. This absence was notwithstanding that the RCAC was explicitly tasked to inquire into dementia care. The RCAC Final Report is shown to marginalise the perspective and experience of people with dementia in the aged care system at the same time as prioritising substitute voices of experts, advocates, family and care partners. This absence of voice repeats and re-inscribes framing of people with dementia as "missing persons". Where people with dementia face practical and legal barriers to participate in civic and legal processes, the RCAC failed to adjust its methodologies to ensure their voices were "heard". The RCAC's re-inscription of marginalisation of people with dementia raises concerns for the legitimacy and success of its recommendations for dementia aged care reform.

People with (a history of) hepatitis C have concerns about privacy and the confidentiality of their health information. This is often due to the association between hepatitis C and injecting drug use and related stigma. In Australia, recent data breaches at a major private health insurer and legislative reforms to increase access to electronic health records have heightened these concerns. Drawing from interviews with people with lived experience of hepatitis C and stakeholders working in this area, this article explores the experiences and concerns of people with (a history of) hepatitis C in relation to the sharing of their health records. It considers the potential application of health privacy principles in the context of hepatitis C and argues for the development of guidelines concerning the privacy of health records held by health departments and public hospitals. Such principles might also inform reforms to legislation regarding access to health records.