The story concludes that “the benefits (of research) outweigh the (privacy) concerns”. But that statement was made by a hospital administrator, not by the patients whose data were used without consent. They weren’t asked or notified.
There are several problems with the idea that the benefits of doing research without consent outweigh the risks:
· the lack of privacy and control over health information causes bad outcomes: when people realize that they cannot control health records, millions refuse diagnosis and treatment for cancer, depression, and sexually-transmitted diseases
· there is no need to choose between respecting patients’ rights to privacy and doing research—it’s a false choice, consent technologies can enable people to easily choose and give automatic consents for research projects they support, or be contacted case-by-case for permission
· there was no public debate about whether every American’s electronic health information should be used for research without consent
· current electronic systems do not allow patients to control any uses of their health data—-why continue to use such badly-designed systems?
· there are no “dangers of over notification” with today’s systems—in fact, patients get no notice at all when personal data is used for research
Americans have not agreed to a healthcare system that turns them into electronic guinea pigs.
Why not build patient-centered systems so we can make important decisions about ourselves, instead of hospital administrators and researchers choosing for us? “Nothing about me without me.”