DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

AU: New privacy guidelines for health practitioners on disclosing genetic information

Posted on December 19, 2009 by Dissent

JOINT MEDIA RELEASE of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and the National Health and Medical Research Council:

The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), in cooperation with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC), today released new guidelines to assist health practitioners in making decisions about disclosing genetic information to their patient’s genetic relatives.

In 2003, a joint inquiry by the Australian Health Ethics Committee and the Australian Law Reform Commission led to an amendment of the Privacy Act regarding the disclosure of genetic information by health practitioners.

The amendment required the development and issuing of these guidelines which have undergone extensive public consultation and been approved under section 95AA of the Privacy Act.

Dr Sandra Hacker AO, chair of the NHMRC’s Guidelines Working Party, said the guidelines specify the strict requirements that must be met by health practitioners if they are faced with the difficult decision of having to disclose genetic information without patient consent.

“These new guidelines permit doctors to disclose information to a genetic relative of the patient without the patient’s consent, but only in situations where they reasonably believe that disclosure is necessary to lessen or prevent a serious threat to the life, health or safety of the patient’s relative,” Dr Hacker said.

“It is important to emphasise that doctors can not disclose information to non-genetic relatives, for example husbands or wives, or when there is no threat to the genetic relative.”

The Australian Privacy Commissioner, Karen Curtis, has issued a Temporary Public Interest Determination (TPID) which will allow medical practitioners to collect or use the contact details of a patient’s genetic relatives in situations where the guidelines permit the disclosure of information.

“It is important to note that the guidelines and TPID do not require disclosure of information, but rather provide the framework for this to occur under the appropriate circumstances,” Ms Curtis said.

“Disclosure of genetic information without consent is only permissible under the Privacy Act if it is in accordance with the guidelines.”

The use and disclosure of genetic information to a patient’s genetic relative under Section 95AA of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) – Guidelines for health practitioners in the private sector’ are available for download at http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/e96syn.htm

Office of the Privacy Commissioner: www.privacy.gov.au/law/act/genetic


Related:

  • Maintenance Note
  • CISA Alert: Reported Supply Chain Compromise Affecting XZ Utils Data Compression Library, CVE-2024-3094
  • System Status Note
  • System Status Note
  • Fraudster's fake data breach claims should remind media to be careful what we report
  • "Pompompurin" taken into custody after violating conditions of pre-sentencing release on bond (1)
Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← OK judge extends block on controversial abortion law
Attorney for doctors in WDH privacy breach disputes AG's finding →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Washington Post hack exposes personal data of John Bolton, almost 10,000 others
  • Draft UK Cyber Security and Resilience Bill Enters UK Parliament
  • Suspected Russian hacker reportedly detained in Thailand, faces possible US extradition
  • Did you hear the one about the ransom victim who made a ransom installment payment after they were told that it wouldn’t be accepted?
  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Maryland Privacy Crackdown Raises Bar for Disclosure Compliance
  • Lawmakers Warn Governors About Sharing Drivers’ Data with Federal Government
  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.