We've been writing about who owns our medical data for a long time. For example:
"Hugo Campos has [an ICD] buried in his chest to help keep him alive. But he has no idea what it says about his faulty heart ... what if Mr Campos wants to see that data for himself?"
An interesting question, no?
Here's another: what if that information was relevant to a crime?
Think that's far-fetched?
Well, thanks to FoIB Holly R, we have the case of Ross Compton:
"A judge says data from the pacemaker of a man accused of setting his Ohio house on fire in 2016 can be presented as evidence at his trial."
His attorney had argued that use of the data "violated Compton's constitutional rights."
Maybe, but the judge didn't agree, saying that "the individual data is no more private than other things."
What "other things" isn't clear, but the message certainly is.
"Hugo Campos has [an ICD] buried in his chest to help keep him alive. But he has no idea what it says about his faulty heart ... what if Mr Campos wants to see that data for himself?"
An interesting question, no?
Here's another: what if that information was relevant to a crime?
Think that's far-fetched?
Well, thanks to FoIB Holly R, we have the case of Ross Compton:
"A judge says data from the pacemaker of a man accused of setting his Ohio house on fire in 2016 can be presented as evidence at his trial."
His attorney had argued that use of the data "violated Compton's constitutional rights."
Maybe, but the judge didn't agree, saying that "the individual data is no more private than other things."
What "other things" isn't clear, but the message certainly is.
Posts
