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

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

  • Iranian Man Pleaded Guilty to Role in Robbinhood Ransomware
  • Developments surrounding data breach at Dutch police
  • Estonia launches international search for Moroccan citizen wanted over data theft
  • Now it’s Tiffany: Another LVMH luxury brand hit by hackers
  • Dutch Government: More forms of espionage to be a criminal offence from 15 May onwards
  • B.C. health authority faces class-action lawsuit over 2009 data breach (1)
  • Private Industry Notification: Silent Ransom Group Targeting Law Firms
  • Data Breach Lawsuits Against Chord Specialty Dental Partners Consolidated
  • PA: York County alerts residents of potential data breach
  • FTC Finalizes Order with GoDaddy over Data Security Failures

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

  • The CCPA emerges as a new legal battleground for web tracking litigation
  • U.S. Spy Agencies Are Getting a One-Stop Shop to Buy Your Most Sensitive Personal Data
  • Period Tracking App Users Win Class Status in Google, Meta Suit
  • AI: the Italian Supervisory Authority fines Luka, the U.S. company behind chatbot “Replika,” 5 Million €
  • D.C. Federal Court Rules Termination of Democrat PCLOB Members Is Unlawful
  • Meta may continue to train AI with user data, German court says
  • Widow of slain Saudi journalist can’t pursue surveillance claims against Israeli spyware firm

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[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.