3 ms·

The best solution may be be to make personal health information (PHI) broadly inadmissable in any non-medical evaluation, decision, assessment, proceeding, or

The best solution may be be to make personal health information (PHI) broadly inadmissable in any non-medical evaluation, decision, assessment, proceeding, or investigation, and then establish specific test criteria for unlocking it for admission. In Canada, our health system cards and numbers are officially not recognized as a form of ID for related reasons. Regarding the bans in those states, do they ban providing the service within the state, or does it ban having the procedure anywhere at all? The privacy impact is very different depending on that rule. The work I've done with health information and privacy and consent directives management has always been a kind of second-best solution. We (Canada) have privacy laws to protect PHI and to require consent for collection, use, and disclosure of your PHI, but agencies regularly run roughshod over it, there is almost zero prosecution or enforcement, and both the research and public health cultures openly express contempt for individual privacy. Even when it comes to reproductive health information, many academic researchers tend to act as though they are entitled to it. The vaccine passports were an example of that culture's approach to bodily integrity and use of personal health information, and while abortion is a different issue and should be treated by itself, they are under the same privacy concept. I wouldn't expect them to treat abortion and reproductive information as any more sacred. How long do you think it's going to take before your fitness tracker makes reports to your insurance and credit company that impact your premiums and interest rates? Banks are using "alternative data" sources for credit decisions already today. The abortion issue may be a forcing function for privacy questions, and I could see a lot of interests rushing into the policy vacuum this leaves.

rootusrootus 4y ago
> do they ban providing the service within the state, or does it ban having the procedure anywhere at all? AFAIK, this has not been tested yet. Although most people seem to be under the impression that states only have jurisdiction within their own borders, not generally over anyone who calls that land their home. I'm sure it will find its way to the supreme court eventually. > How long do you think it's going to take before your fitness tracker makes reports to your insurance and credit company that impact your premiums and interest rates? This already happens, though it is voluntary. Both with fitness trackers, and in the case of car insurance with OBD2 trackers that phone home with your driving habits. > Banks are using "alternative data" sources for credit decisions already today Heck, not just banks. E.g. Best Buy uses alternative data sources to decide whether or not you are allowed to return an item that you've purchased. At some point I hope we at least pass a law that says something to the effect of "all data that can be reasonably tied to an individual is required to be available for review and correction, and all businesses engaged in the collection or use of such data shall be publicly registered as such." Or we could just make the data collection (or at least sharing) illegal outright. That'd be nice.
sandworm101 4y ago
>> do they ban providing the service within the state, or does it ban having the procedure anywhere at all? States have substantial powers in this area. If they declare the unborn to be a "person" then they can do things to protect those people from being removed from the state. Some are talking about charging women with murder should they travel to another state for an abortion. The rules about people moving between states to take advantage of different laws are very old. They go to slavery and allowing or not allowing people to move between slave and free states. Similarly, the rules governing how and when people are extradited between states go back that far too. We could soon see states like New York refusing to extradite women charged with an abortion-related offenses. This would mirror very old cases of escaped slaves not being returned.

rootusrootus 4y ago

> do they ban providing the service within the state, or does it ban having the procedure anywhere at all? AFAIK, this has not been tested yet. Although most people seem to be under the impression that states only have jurisdiction within their own borders, not generally over anyone who calls that land their home. I'm sure it will find its way to the supreme court eventually. > How long do you think it's going to take before your fitness tracker makes reports to your insurance and credit company that impact your premiums and interest rates? This already happens, though it is voluntary. Both with fitness trackers, and in the case of car insurance with OBD2 trackers that phone home with your driving habits. > Banks are using "alternative data" sources for credit decisions already today Heck, not just banks. E.g. Best Buy uses alternative data sources to decide whether or not you are allowed to return an item that you've purchased. At some point I hope we at least pass a law that says something to the effect of "all data that can be reasonably tied to an individual is required to be available for review and correction, and all businesses engaged in the collection or use of such data shall be publicly registered as such." Or we could just make the data collection (or at least sharing) illegal outright. That'd be nice.

sandworm101 4y ago

>> do they ban providing the service within the state, or does it ban having the procedure anywhere at all? States have substantial powers in this area. If they declare the unborn to be a "person" then they can do things to protect those people from being removed from the state. Some are talking about charging women with murder should they travel to another state for an abortion. The rules about people moving between states to take advantage of different laws are very old. They go to slavery and allowing or not allowing people to move between slave and free states. Similarly, the rules governing how and when people are extradited between states go back that far too. We could soon see states like New York refusing to extradite women charged with an abortion-related offenses. This would mirror very old cases of escaped slaves not being returned.