Privacy confidentiality and disclosure ethical considerations

Community Connect Transport upholds the rights of service users, carers and families to privacy and confidentiality of information regarding background, health status and other personal information and takes steps to ensure that privacy is maintained under all reasonable circumstances.

Community Connect Transport recognises that service users, carers and families have the right to access information about themselves, held by the service.

Community Connect Transport adheres to both state and commonwealth privacy legislation requirements regarding the collection, use and protection of personal information of our Service Users and Team Members.

The Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Act 2012 (Commonwealth legislation) which outlines 11 Australian Privacy Principles (APPs).

Principle 1: Open and transparent management of personal information
‘To ensure that APP entities manage personal information in an open and transparent way’, this enhances the accountability and builds trust in the community over the organisations handling of personal information. The organisation must have an up-to-date Privacy policy which is accessible to all stakeholders.

Principle 2: Anonymity and pseudonymity
‘Provides that individuals must have the option of not identifying themselves or of using a pseudonym, when dealing with an APP entity in relation to a particular matter’. This will not apply if under court order or impractical for service provision.

Principle 3: Collection of solicited personal information
‘The entity must not collect personal information unless the information is reasonably necessary for one or more of the entity’s functions or activities’.

Principle 4: Dealing with unsolicited personal information
The entity will, if it comes into possession of personal information that may not be required for service delivery, determine if the information was a result of standard data collection and if not required it will destroy the information or ensure it is de-identified.

Personal 5: Notification of the collection of personal information
The entity must take steps as soon as practicably possible to notify the individual of the reasons for collecting personal information and who is collecting it.

Principle 6: Use or disclosure of personal information
‘If an entity holds personal information about an individual that was collected for a particular purpose (the primary purpose), the entity must not disclose the information for another purpose (the secondary purpose) unless the individual has consented. If an organisation passes on personal information to third parties with the consent of the service user it must be de-identified.

Principle 7: Direct marketing
‘If an organisation holds personal information about an individual, the organisation must not use or disclose the information for the purpose of direct marketing.’

Principle 8: Cross-border disclosure of personal information
This principle refers to the transfer of personal information to an overseas location which is not applicable to the service at this time.

Principle 9: Adoption, use or disclosure of government related identifiers
An organisation must not adopt a government related identifier of an individual as its own identifier of the individual unless it is required or authorized by law or a court/tribunal order.

Principle 10: Quality of personal information
An entity must take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that the personal information that is collected, used or disclosed is accurate, up-to-date, complete and relevant.

Principle 11: Security of personal information
If an entity holds personal information they must take steps as are reasonable to protect the information from misuse, interference, unauthorised access, modification, loss and disclosure. The entity must ensure that if information is no longer required that it is destroyed and/or de-identified.

1. General Medical Council [GMC] (2017). Confidentiality: good practice in handling patient. Available at https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/documents/confidentiality-good-practice-in-handling-patient-information---english-0417_pdf-70080105.pdf

2. Mechanic D, Meyer S. (2000). Concepts of trust among patients with serious illness. Soc Sci Med, 51(5): 657–68. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Flynn HA, Marcus SM, Kerber K, Alessi N. (2003). Patients concerns about and perceptions of electronic psychiatric records. Psychiatr Serv, 54(11): 1539–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Sankar P, Moran S, Merz JF, Jones NL. (2003). Patient perspectives of medical confidentiality: a review of the literature. J Gen Intern Med, 18(8): 659–69. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Maddick AF, Laurent S. (2012). Consent, competence and confidentiality for children and young people: case problems from osteopathic practice. Intern J Osteopathic Med, 15(3), 111–19. [Google Scholar]

6. Beltran-Aroca CM, Girela-Lopez E, Collazo-Chao E, et al. (2016). Confidentiality breaches in clinical practice: what happens in hospitals? BMC Med Ethics, 17(1): 52. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Elger BS. (2009). Violations of medical confidentiality opinions of primary care physicians. Br J Gen Pract, 59(567): e344–52. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Tyson P. (2011). The Hippocratic oath today. www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath-today.html

9. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (2009). Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. Available at https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html

10. Jonsen AR, Siegler M, Winslade WJ. (2010). Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. 7th ed McGraw-Hill; New York, USA. [Google Scholar]

11. Tobin BM, Leeder SR, Somerville ER. (2002). Community versus individual benefit. Med J Aust, 176(6): 279–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Agyapong VI, Kirrane R, Bangaru R. (2009). Medical confidentiality versus disclosure: ethical and legal dilemmas. J Forensic Leg Med, 16(2): 93–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. (2011). The AMA Code of Medical Ethics’ opinions on confidentiality of patient information. Virtual Mentor, 13(7): 475–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. General Medical Council [GMC] (2013). Confidentiality: protecting and providing information. Available at http://www.gmcuk.org/guidance/ethical_guid-ance/confidentiality_53_56_disclosures_to_protect_others.asp

15. British Medical Association [BMA] (2011). Confidentiality and disclosure of health information. https://www.bma.org.uk/-/media/files/pdfs/practical%20advice%20at%20work/ethics/confidentialitytoolkit_full.pdf?la=en

16. Conseil National de L’Ordre des Médecins (2013). French code of medical ethics. Confidentiality, Article 4. Available at https://www.conseil-national.medecin.fr/sites/default/files/code_de_deontologie_version_anglaise.pdf

17. Guedj M, Sastre MT, Mullet E, Sorum PC. (2009). Is it acceptable for a psychiatrist to break confidentiality to prevent spousal violence? Int J Law Psychiatry, 32(2): 108–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Tarasoff V. Regents of the University of California (1976). http://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/tarasoff-v-regents-university-california-30278

19. Berlin ED, Bravender T. (2009). Confidentiality, consent and caring for the adolescent patient. Curr Opin Pediatr, 21(4): 450–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Spear S, English A. (2007). Protecting confidentiality to safeguard adolescents’ health: finding common ground. Contraception, 76(2): 73–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Lehrer JA, Pantell R, Tebb K, Shafer MA. (2007). Forgone health care among U.S. adolescents: associations between risk characteristics and confidentiality concern. J Adolesc Health, 40(3): 218–26. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Ford CA, Millstein SG, Halpern-Felsher BL, Irwin CE., Jr (1997). Influence of physician confidentiality assurances on adolescents’ willingness to disclose information and seek future health care. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 278(12): 1029–34. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Klein JD, Wilson KM, McNulty M, Kapphahn C, Collins KS. (1999). Access to medical care for adolescents: results from the 1997 Commonwealth Fund Survey of the Health of Adolescent Girls. J Adolesc Health, 25(2): 120–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Duncan RE, Vandeleur M, Derks A, Sawyer S. (2011). Confidentiality with adolescents in the medical setting: what do parents think? J Adolesc Health, 49(4): 428–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. McKee MD, ÓSullivan LF, Weber CM. (2006). Perspectives on confidential care for adolescent girls. Ann Fam Med, 4(6): 519–26. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Gilbert AL, Rickert VI, Aalsma MC. (2014). Clinical conversations about health: the impact of confidentiality in preventive adolescent care. J Adolesc Health, 55(5): 672–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Lawrence RE, Rasinski KA, Yoon JD, Curlin FA. (2011). Adolescents, contraception and confidentiality: a national survey of obstetrician-gynecologists. Contraception, 84(3), 259–65. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Deneyer M, Devroey D, De Groot E, Buyl R, Clybouw C, Vandenplas Y. (2011). Informative privacy and confidentiality for adolescents: the attitude of the Flemish paediatrician anno 2010. Eur J Pediatr, 170(9): 1159–63. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Sethi N, Lane G, Newton S, et al. (2014). Disaster easily averted? Data confidentiality and the hospital desktop computer. Int J Med Inform, 83(5): 385–91. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Page 2

The challenges of confidentiality in clinical practice

	Challenges	subthemes	Examples
1	Management issues	Insufficient Laws and regulations Insufficient policies	Lack of national confidentiality guideline, lack of transparency in IPC and disciplinary regulations, no definition of patients benefit or the benefit of society, no clarification about physicians responsibilities, Lack of transparent policy, lack of implementation mechanisms, lack of monitoring mechanisms
2	Organizational ethics	Insufficient organizational regulationsImproper infrastructureHuman resources Technologic impairment	Lack of transparent regulations for management of data publication, data accessibility; non-efficient hospital ethics committees, non-awareness, data safety in cyberspace
3	Physician-patient relationship	Service providersMeanings & measurements Healthcare recipient	Gap of knowledge, insufficient attention, paternalism, physicians judgment, no definition of patients risk, and emergency vs. non-emergency situations, patients awareness,

Kryto Eth

Privacy confidentiality and disclosure ethical considerations

Page 2

Pos Terkait

Periklanan

BERITA TERKINI

Toplist Popular

Periklanan

Terpopuler

Periklanan

Tentang Kami

Legal

Dukungan

Social