More troubling news on the Daniel Hauser case, from the AP:
A Minnesota judge has denied a request to seal the medical records of a 13-year-old boy who gained national attention when he fled the state last month to avoid chemotherapy to treat his Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Brown County District Judge John Rodenberg ruled this week that information about Daniel Hauser’s condition and treatment have been public so far, so that information should remain public. He also noted that the boy’s parents have spoken about the case in the media.
Although the public had an interest in the legal issues of whether a court could require treatment, once the treatment has been ordered and the rationale for the judge’s decision made public, does the public still have a compelling interest that would justify continuing to breach medical privacy and the confidentiality the young man should have?
Does the fact that his parents openly discuss the case with the media serve as an acceptable part of the judge’s logic to waive the young man’s rights? The AP reports:
Rodenberg also ruled that because of interest in Daniel’s case, the public would be best served by getting complete and accurate information.
There are lots of issues that the public is interested in, including the private lives of celebrities and politicians. Daniel is not really a public figure by choice. For my money, the judge should not be so concerned about serving the public and be more concerned about the issue of medical privacy of a private citizen.