The Changing Legal and Conceptual Shape of Health Care Privacy

Author:

Magnusson Roger S.

Abstract

The contributions of Professor Bernard Dickens to health law and bioethics span the era in which these fields have emerged as distinct domains of teaching, scholarship and professional and public conversation. Neither field exists in a vacuum. The concerns of bioethics, like the content of health law, are a product of social forces. The bureaucratization of medical care, the possibilities and uncertainties created by developments in medical technology, not to mention glaring health inequalities, have been destabilizing forces in medicine. Writing in 1974, American sociologist Renée Fox noted that medicine had reached “a stage of development characterized by diffuse ethical and existential self-consciousness.” This new medical introspection was evidenced by intense engagement with issues of biomedical regulation, and with the growth of professional codes and processes for resolving value-laden issues within clinical settings.While sometimes described as a process or site for discussion and “engagement,” bioethics evolved rapidly into a domain of governance, with direct implications for clinical practice.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Health Policy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Reference99 articles.

1. 80. See, e.g. Civil Code (Cal) § 56.17; Insurance Code (Cal) § 10140–10145.4; Health and Safety Code (Cal) §§ 1374.7, 124975–124980; Civil Rights Law (NY) § 79–1; Insurance Code (Tex) § 546. For a complete listing of State laws, see (last visited August 27, 2004).

2. 75. 45 C.F.R. § 164.501; CDC, “HIPAA Privacy Rule and Public Health,” MMWR 52 (2003): 1–12.

3. 20. See, e.g. California Civil Code §§ 56–56.37. In Australia, see, e.g. Health Services Act 1988 (Vic) s. 141.

4. “Piercing the Veil of Secrecy in HIV/AIDS and Other Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Theories of Privacy and Disclosure in Partner Notification,”;Gostin;Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy,1998

5. 19. X v Y [1988] 2 All ER 648, 658, 660 (disclosure of HIV/AIDS); W v Egdell [1990] 1 All ER 835, 845–46, 848–49 (disclosure of propensity towards violence). For the limits of the duty in Australia, see Kadian v Richards [2004] NSWSC 382, at para 45; Sullivan v Sclanders (2000) 77 SASR 419, 424–7.

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3