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

  • International cybercrime tackled: Amsterdam police and FBI dismantle proxy service Anyproxy
  • Moldovan Police Arrest Suspect in €4.5M Ransomware Attack on Dutch Research Agency
  • N.W.T.’s medical record system under the microscope after 2 reported cases of snooping
  • Department of Justice says Berkeley Research Group data breach may have exposed information on diocesan sex abuse survivors
  • Masimo Manufacturing Facilities Hit by Cyberattack
  • Education giant Pearson hit by cyberattack exposing customer data
  • Star Health hacker claims sending bullets, threats to top executives: Reports
  • Nova Scotia Power hit by cyberattack, critical infrastructure targeted, no outages reported
  • Georgia hospital defeats data-tracking lawsuit
  • 60K BTC Wallets Tied to LockBit Ransomware Gang Leaked

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

  • FTC dismisses privacy concerns in Google breakup
  • ARC sells airline ticket records to ICE and others
  • Clothing Retailer, Todd Snyder, Inc., Settles CPPA Allegations Regarding California Consumer Privacy Act Violations
  • US Customs and Border Protection Plans to Photograph Everyone Exiting the US by Car
  • Google agrees to pay Texas $1.4 billion data privacy settlement
  • The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech
  • Florida bill requiring encryption backdoors for social media accounts has failed

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.