Keyword field-free conjunctive keyword searches on encrypted data and extension for dynamic groups

We consider the following problem: a user stores encrypted documents on an untrusted server, and wishes to retrieve all documents containing some keywords without any loss of data confidentiality. Conjunctive keyword searches on encrypted data have been studied by numerous researchers over the past few years, and all existing schemes use keyword fields as compulsory information. This however is impractical for many applications. In this paper, we propose a scheme of keyword field-free conjunctive keyword searches on encrypted data, which affirmatively answers an open problem asked by Golle et al. at ACNS 2004. Furthermore, the proposed scheme is extended to the dynamic group setting. Security analysis of our constructions is given in the paper.

Case note : Keegan v Sussan Corporation (Aust) Pty Ltd

A recent decision of the Queensland Supreme Court highlights that merely having a policy in a workplace is not sufficient in itself – the policy must be implemented and followed if an employer wishes to establish that it is not in breach of its duty of care owed to employees. In Keegan v Sussan Corporation (Aust) Pty Ltd an employee successfully sued in negligence for her psychiatric injury caused by her employer’s failure to follow its bullying and harassment policy.

Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment in a patient's best interests : Australian judicial deliberations

•Intractable disputes about withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack capacity are rare but challenging. Judicial resolution may be needed in some of these cases. •A central concept for judicial (and clinical) decision making in this area is a patient's “best interests”. Yet what this term means is contested. •There is an emerging Supreme Court jurisprudence that sheds light on when life-sustaining treatment will, or will not, be judged to be in a patient's best interests. •Treatment that is either futile or overly burdensome is not in a patient's best interests. Although courts will consider patient and family wishes, they have generally deferred to the views of medical practitioners about treatment decisions.

Reflections from damaged modernity

The cliché about modern architecture being the fairy-tale fulfillment of every fantasy ceases to be a cliché only when it is accompanied by the fairy tale’s moral: that the fulfillment of the wishes rarely engenders goodness in the one doing the wishing (Adorno). Wishing for the right things in architecture and the city is the most difficult art of all: since the grim childhood-tales of the twentieth century we have been weaned from dreams and utopias, the stuff of modernism’s bad conscience. For Adorno writing in 1953, Hollywood cinema was a medium of “regression” based on infantile wish fulfillment manufactured by the industrial repetition (mimesis) of the filmic image that he called a modern “hieroglyphics,” like the archaic language of pictures in Ancient Egypt which guaranteed immortality after death in Egyptian burial rites. Arguably, today the iconic architecture industry is the executor of archaic images of modernity linked to rituals of death, promises of omnipotence and immortality. As I will argue in this symposium, such buildings are not a reflection of external ‘reality,’ but regression to an internal architectural polemic that secretly carries out the rituals of modernism’s death and seeks to make good on the liabilities of architectural history.

Palliative care and other physicians’ knowledge, attitudes and practice relating to the law on withholding/withdrawing life-sustaining treatment: Survey results

Background: To effectively care for people who are terminally ill, including those without decision-making capacity, palliative care physicians must know and understand the legal standing of Advance Care Planning (ACP) in their jurisdiction of practice. This includes the use of advance directives/living wills (ADs) and substitute decision-makers (SDMs) who can legally consent to or refuse treatment if there is no valid AD. Aim: The study aimed to investigate the knowledge, attitudes and practices of medical specialists most often involved in end-of-life care in relation to the law on withholding/ withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (WWLST) from adults without decision-making capacity. Design/participants: A pre-piloted survey was posted to specialists in palliative, emergency, geriatric, renal and respiratory medicine, intensive care and medical oncology in three Australian States. Surveys were analysed using SPSS20 and SAS 9.3. Results: The overall response rate was 32% (867/2702); 52% from palliative care specialists. Palliative Care specialists and Geriatricians had significantly more positive attitudes towards the law (χ242 = 94.352; p < 0.001) and higher levels of knowledge about the WWLST law (χ27 = 30.033; p < 0.001), than did the other specialists, while still having critical gaps in their knowledge. Conclusions: A high level of knowledge of the law is essential to ensure that patients’ wishes and decisions, expressed through ACP, are respected to the maximum extent possible within the law, thereby according with the principles and philosophy of palliative care. It is also essential to protect health professionals from legal action resulting from unauthorised provision or removal of treatment.

Advance care planning in stroke: Influence of time on engagement in the process

Purpose Individuals who experience stroke have a higher likelihood of subsequent stroke events, making it imperative to plan for future medical care. In the event of a further serious health event, engaging in the process of advanced care planning (ACP) can help family members and health care professionals (HCPs) make medical decisions for individuals who have lost the capacity to do so. Few studies have explored the views and experiences of patients with stroke about discussing their wishes and preferences for future medical events, and the extent to which stroke HCPs engage in conversations around planning for such events. In this study, we sought to understand how the process of ACP unfolded between HCPs and patients post-stroke. Patients and methods Using grounded theory (GT) methodology, we engaged in direct observation of HCP and patient interactions on an acute stroke unit and two stroke rehabilitation units. Using semi-structured interviews, 14 patients and four HCPs were interviewed directly about the ACP process. Results We found that open and continual ACP conversations were not taking place, patients experienced an apparent lack of urgency to engage in ACP, and HCPs were uncomfortable initiating ACP conversations due to the sensitive nature of the topic. Conclusion In this study, we identified lack of engagement in ACP post-stroke, attributable to patient and HCP factors. This encourages us to look further into the process of ACP in order to develop open communication between the patient with stroke, their families, and stroke HCPs.

Assessing testamentary capacity – who does it better? Lawyers or doctors?

The effects of mentally disabling conditions on legal capacity are escalating, particularly given the ageing Australian demographic. Wills, enduring powers of attorney, and advance health directives are coming to the fore as a means of ensuring that the wishes of people with regard to their property, finances and health care needs are respected should they become legally incapable of making their own decisions. Assessing when a person has lost legal capacity in this context is an ever-increasing concern facing society as a whole but, in particular, the legal and medical professionals conducting the assessments. Empirical and doctrinal research has been undertaken which canvassed legal and medical opinions about the relationship between members of these professions when assessing legal capacity. This research supports the hypothesis that tensions exist when assessing capacity, especially testamentary capacity. One source of tension is the effect of conflicting evidence about the loss of legal capacity given by legal and medical professionals in court, which raises questions such as: which evidence is, and should be, preferred; and who should be responsible? The exploration of these issues will be conducted with reference to the empirical data collected, and a review of the relevant Australian case law.