Frenkell David A, Wood David M
Med Law. 2015 Sep;34(1):285-296.
The relationship between public interest and privacy is complex, particularly in healthcare. If public interest overrides the right to privacy, medical staff may be forced to break confidentiality beyond what is permitted by law. Should politicians be excluded from the definition of "patients" when confidentiality is concerned? Should that "exclusion" be broadened to include judges and other public figures, for example, leaders of industry? Would it not be reasonable to entrust a medical team, who may assess their health state and inform the public of their assessment without divulging private medical data? Nothing will prevent any person from revealing their own medical state to the public; nonetheless, it should be at their discretion. Once a person dies, his right to privacy of health information should be with his heirs. Voyeurism should not be elevated to become a tool for legalising violations of health confidentiality.
公共利益与隐私之间的关系错综复杂，在医疗保健领域尤为如此。如果公共利益凌驾于隐私权之上，医护人员可能会被迫违反保密规定，超出法律允许的范围。在涉及保密问题时，政治家是否应被排除在“患者”的定义之外？这种“排除”是否应扩大到包括法官和其他公众人物，例如行业领袖？委托一个医疗团队评估他们的健康状况并向公众通报评估结果而不泄露私人医疗数据，这难道不合理吗？没有什么能阻止任何人向公众透露自己的健康状况；尽管如此，这应该由他们自行决定。一旦一个人去世，他的健康信息隐私权应由其继承人享有。偷窥行为不应被提升为侵犯健康保密规定合法化的工具。
