Search

Copyright of Verwaltung und Management: Zeitschrift für Moderne Verwaltung (VM) is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

One area where the application of data protection law has proven complex is in relation to the secondary usage of health data in EHRs for medical research. Here the tension between the privacy interests of patients and the risk of harm if such sensitive data are compromised, and on the other side, the potential societal value of utilizing the data for the benefit of medical science, is especially striking. In this paper, we consider the applicable provisions of the EU Data Protection Directive, and outline a general approach to patient data handling for research, which we believe to be compatible with relevant legal and ethical requirements. We then illustrate and apply this by reference to a specific EU FP7 project, involving EHR data processing to select patients for clinical pharmaceutical trials. After introducing the project (PONTE), we explain the ‘devolved’ data protection architecture it employs and provide a legal evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper offers an overview of the rules under German law for securing accountability and redress in cases of medical injury. It is divided into three main parts. Part I looks at the various legal consequences that may apply in such circumstances, including criminal and professional liability of the doctor, the bases for a private law claim by the patient, and the existence of pockets of non-fault based liability for injury from medical products. Part II then considers in greater detail the elements to be satisfied in respect to the two key forms of private law malpractice claim, namely faulty treatment and faulty information disclosure. Also examined is the underlying system of medical liability insurance, as well as the workings of medical arbitration boards that facilitate settlements in appropriate cases. Finally, in Part III, there is an evaluation of the current compensation rules, including their continued viability, in the light of available empirical data. The emergent patient safety movement in Germany is also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper defends the acts/omissions distinction which underpins the present law on euthanasia, from various criticisms (including from within the judiciary itself), and aims to show that it is supported by fundamental principles. After rejecting arguments that deny the coherence and/or legal relevance of the distinction, the discussion proceeds to focus on the causal relationship between the doctor and the patient's death in each case. Although previous analyses, challenging the causal efficacy of omissions generally, are shown to be deficient, it is argued that in certain cases of causing death by omission the causal authorship of the doctor lapses. The final part of the paper examines why this should be morally significant and proposes an answer in terms of the principle of equality. Assuming all other factors are equal, the infringement of this principle provides an additional reason against actively killing a patient, which is not present in cases of passively letting die. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]