Medical negligence, causation and liability for non-disclosure of risk : a post-wallace framework and critique

Through an examination of Wallace v Kam, this article considers and evaluates the law of causation in the specific context of a medical practitioner’s duty to provide information to patients concerning material risks of treatment. To supply a contextual background for the analysis which follows, Part II summarises the basic principles of causation law, while Part III provides an overview of the case and the reasoning adopted in the decisions at first instance and on appeal. With particular emphasis upon the reasoning in the courts of appeal, Part IV then examines the implications of the case in the context of other jurisprudence in this field and, in so doing, provides a framework for a structured consideration of causation issues in future non-disclosure cases under the Australian civil liability legislation. As will become clear, Wallace was fundamentally decided on the basis of policy reasoning centred upon the purpose behind the legal duty violated. Although the plurality in Rogers v Whitaker rejected the utility of expressions such as ‘the patient’s right of self-determination’ in this context, some Australian jurisprudence may be thought to frame the practitioner’s duty to warn in terms of promoting a patient’s autonomy, or right to decide whether to submit to treatment proposed. Accordingly, the impact of Wallace upon the protection of this right, and the interrelation between it and the duty to warn’s purpose, is investigated. The analysis in Part IV also evaluates the courts’ reasoning in Wallace by questioning the extent to which Wallace’s approach to liability and causal connection in non-disclosure of risk cases: depends upon the nature and classification of the risk(s) in question; and can be reconciled with the way in which patients make decisions. Finally, Part V adopts a comparative approach by considering whether the same decision might be reached if Wallace was determined according to English law.

On the Security of Two RFID Mutual Authentication Protocols

In this paper, the security of two recent RFID mutual authentication protocols are investigated. The first protocol is a scheme proposed by Huang et al. [7] and the second one by Huang, Lin and Li [6]. We show that these two protocols have several weaknesses. In Huang et al.’s scheme, an adversary can determine the 32-bit secret password with a probability of 2−2 , and in Huang-Lin-Li scheme, a passive adversary can recognize a target tag with a success probability of 1−2−4 and an active adversary can determine all 32 bits of Access password with success probability of 2−4 . The computational complexity of these attacks is negligible.

Individuals, Innovation, and the Internet : Why Access is Essential

As each day passes, and as new and better devices and services are developed, more and more government and private services are being moved to an online format. This movement makes access to the internet an essential for 21st Century life. The internet has become so integrated in our lives that many of us cannot imagine how we could operate without it. This omnipresent ‘being’ affects all forms of ‘normal’ social and economic activity and does so in ways that we do not realize. Those with access are able to engage with government, business, and family and friends more easily, which can lead to an improved standard of living. For the disadvantaged, however – those with the desire but without the capacity – a lack of access can be socially isolating. "Between the idea And the reality Between the motion And the act Falls the Shadow – T. S. Elliott. “The Hollow Men” Engagement in the internet economy requires both physical access and the individual to have the necessary finances and skills to make and sustain their use. If governments and the international community want a fully functioning internet economy this requires that all individuals must be operating in it. That not all individuals do so means, very simply, that the internet economy is not fully functioning. The text contextualizes for policy makers and legislatures why it is essential to ensure that individuals have appropriate access to the internet and what can be done to achieve it. The interrelationship/overlap between why access is essential, how it can be achieved and the central role of the individual to the internet economy is explored and translated into the concept of connectedness. From this, solutions for ensuring connectedness for all individuals are developed. It is Dr Cradduck’s hope that in the not too distant future readers will puzzle over why texts such as this needed to be written.

Unspeakably present: The (un)acknowledgment of diverse sexuality and gender human rights in Australian youth justice systems

A number of international human rights frameworks protect the rights of young people in contact with the criminal justice system in states parties, including Australia. These frameworks inform youth justice policy in Australia’s jurisdictions. While the frameworks protect young people’s right to non-discrimination on the grounds of ‘race’, religion and political opinion, the rights of young people to non-discrimination on the grounds of sexuality and gender diversity are not explicitly protected. This is problematic given that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) young people appear over-represented in youth justice systems. This article argues that the exclusion of this group from human rights frameworks has an important flow-on effect: the marginalisation of the right of LGBTIQ young people to non-discrimination in policy and discourse that is informed by international human rights frameworks. After outlining the relevant frameworks, this article examines the evidence about LGBTIQ young people’s interactions with youth justice agencies, particularly police. The evidence indicates that the human rights of LGBTIQ young people are frequently breached in these interactions. We conclude by arguing that it is timely to consider how best to protect the human rights of LBGTIQ young people and keep their rights on the agenda.

Examining the effectiveness of Police-Citizens Youth Clubs on crime prevention and community safety

PCYCs, individually and as a whole, are highly valued in communities across Queensland. Participants in this evaluation identified numerous benefits of PCYCs, including: providing structured low-cost activities for young people and other community groups; developing positive relationships and trust between young people and police; developing young people into effective citizens; providing a safe place for young people and a hub for whole communities; addressing disadvantages faced by young people; and fostering social inclusion. Depending on the particular activities and programs delivered by a branch, PCYCs have the capacity to minimise risk factors and enhance protective factors relating to young people’s involvement in crime. For example, PCYCs can play an important role in strengthening young people’s engagement with education and family. However, the crime prevention and community safety aims of PCYCs, and measures that might work towards these aims are not widely- or well-understood, or appreciated, by those working in and with PCYCs. The key recommendation of this evaluation is therefore that the crime prevention and community safety aims of PCYCs in Queensland need to be better articulated, understood and reflected in the practice of those working in and with PCYCs. A related key finding is that many of the activities and programs currently provided by PCYCs could be better oriented towards the goals of crime prevention and community safety without major resource implications.

The dawn of the age of the drones:An Australian privacy law perspective

Suppose a homeowner habitually enjoys sunbathing in his or her backyard, protected by a high fence from prying eyes, including those of an adolescent neighbour. In times past such homeowners could be assured that they might go about their activities without a threat to their privacy. However, recent years have seen technological advances in the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (‘UAVs’), also known colloquially as drones, that have allowed them to become more reduced in size, complexity and price. UAVs today include models retailing to the public for less than $350 and with an ease of operation that enables them to serve as mobile platforms for miniature cameras. These machines now mean that for individuals like the posited homeowner’s adolescent neighbour, barriers such as high fences no longer constitute insuperable obstacles to their voyeuristic endeavours. Moreover, ease of access to the internet and video sharing websites provides a ready means of sharing any recordings made with such cameras with a wide audience. Persons in the homeowner’s position might understandably seek some form of redress for such egregious invasions of their privacy. Other than some kind of self-help, what alternative measures may be available?

The Jean Chretien Pledge to Africa act: Patent law and humanitarian aid

This article evaluates the implementation of the WTO General Council Decision in 2003, which resolved that developed nations could export patented pharmaceutical drugs to member states in order to address public health issues - such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other epidemics. The Jean Chretien Pledge to Africa Act 2004 (Canada) provides authorisation for the export of pharmaceutical drugs from Canada to developing countries to address public health epidemics. The European Union has issued draft regulations governing the export of pharmaceutical drugs. A number of European countries - including Norway, the Netherlands, France, and Switzerland - are seeking to pass domestic legislation to give force to the WTO General Council Decision. Australia has shown little initiative in seeking to implement such international agreements dealing with access to essential medicines. It is argued that Australia should implement humanitarian legislation to embody the WTO General Council Decision, emulating models in Canada, Norway, and the European Union. Ideally, there should be no right of first refusal; the list of pharmaceutical drugs should be open-ended; and the eligible importing countries should not be limited to members of the WTO.

Working the story : News curation in social media as a second save of citizen journalism

For the first decade of its existence, the concept of citizen journalism has described an approach which was seen as a broadening of the participant base in journalistic processes, but still involved only a comparatively small subset of overall society – for the most part, citizen journalists were news enthusiasts and “political junkies” (Coleman, 2006) who, as some exasperated professional journalists put it, “wouldn’t get a job at a real newspaper” (The Australian, 2007), but nonetheless followed many of the same journalistic principles. The investment – if not of money, then at least of time and effort – involved in setting up a blog or participating in a citizen journalism Website remained substantial enough to prevent the majority of Internet users from engaging in citizen journalist activities to any significant extent; what emerged in the form of news blogs and citizen journalism sites was a new online elite which for some time challenged the hegemony of the existing journalistic elite, but gradually also merged with it. The mass adoption of next-generation social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, however, has led to the emergence of a new wave of quasi-journalistic user activities which now much more closely resemble the “random acts of journalism” which JD Lasica envisaged in 2003. Social media are not exclusively or even predominantly used for citizen journalism; instead, citizen journalism is now simply a by-product of user communities engaging in exchanges about the topics which interest them, or tracking emerging stories and events as they happen. Such platforms – and especially Twitter with its system of ad hoc hashtags that enable the rapid exchange of information about issues of interest – provide spaces for users to come together to “work the story” through a process of collaborative gatewatching (Bruns, 2005), content curation, and information evaluation which takes place in real time and brings together everyday users, domain experts, journalists, and potentially even the subjects of the story themselves. Compared to the spaces of news blogs and citizen journalism sites, but also of conventional online news Websites, which are controlled by their respective operators and inherently position user engagement as a secondary activity to content publication, these social media spaces are centred around user interaction, providing a third-party space in which everyday as well as institutional users, laypeople as well as experts converge without being able to control the exchange. Drawing on a number of recent examples, this article will argue that this results in a new dynamic of interaction and enables the emergence of a more broadly-based, decentralised, second wave of citizen engagement in journalistic processes.

Re-theorizing the “digital divide”: Identifying dimensions of social exclusion in contemporary media technologies

The digital divide is the disparancy in access to information, in the ability to communicate, and in the capacity to make information and communication serve full participation in the information society. Indeed, the conversation about the digital divide has developed over the last decade from a focus on connectivity and access to information and communication technologies, to a conversation that encompasses the ability to use them and to the utility that usage provides (Wei et al., 2011). However, this conversation, while transitioning from technology to the skills of the people that use them and to the fruits of their use is limited in its ability to take into account the social role of information and communication technologies (ICTs). One successful attempt in conceptualizing the social impact of the differences in access to and utilization of digital communication technologies, was developed by van Dijk (2005) whose sequential model for analyzing the divide states that: 1. Categorical inequalities in society produce an unequal distribution of resources; 2. An unequal distribution of resources causes unequal access to digital technologies; 3. Unequal access to digital technologies also depends on the characteristics of these technologies; 4. Unequal access to digital technologies brings about unequal participation in society; 5. Unequal participation in society reinforces categorical inequalities and unequal distributions of resources.” (p. 15) As van Dijk’s model demonstrates, the divide’s impact is the exclusion of individuals from participation. Still left to be defined are the “categorical inequalities,” the “resources,” the “characteristics of digital technologies,” and the different levels of “access” that result in differentiated levels of participation, as these change over time due to the evolving nature of technology and the dynamics of society. And most importantly, the meaning of “participation” in contemporary society needs to be determined as it is differentiated levels of participation that are the result of the divide and the engine of the ever-growing disparities. Our argument is structured in the following manner: We first claim that contemporary digital media differ from the previous generation of ICTs along four dimensions: They offer an abundance of information resources and communication channels when compared to the relative paucity of both in the past; they offer mobility as opposed to the stationary nature of their predecessors; they are interactive in that they provide users with the capability to design their own media environments in contrast to the dictated environs of previous architectures; and, they allow users to communicate utilizing multi forms of mediation, unlike the uniformity of sound or word that limited users in the past. We then submit that involvement in the information society calls for egalitarian access to all four dimensions of the user experience that make contemporary media different from their predecessors and that the ability to experience all four affects the levels in which humans partake in the shaping of society. The model being cyclical, we then discuss how lower levels of participation contribute to the enhancement of social inequalities. Finally, we discuss why participation is needed in order to achieve full membership in the information society and what political philosophy should govern policy solutions targeting the re-inclusion of those digitally excluded.

A Submission to the Inquiry into the Resale Royalty Right for Visual Artists Bill 2008 (Cth)

A right of resale, or droit de suite (a right to follow), is a legislative instrument under intellectual property law, which enables artists to receive a percentage of the sale price whenever artistic works are resold. A French legal scholar, Albert Vaunois, first articulated the need for a 'droit de suite' in connection with fine art back in 1893. The French Government introduced a scheme to protect the right of resale in 1920, after controversy over artists living in poverty, while public auction houses were profiting from the resale of their artistic creations. In the United States, there has been less support for a right of resale amongst legislatures. After lobbying from artists such as the king of pop art, Robert Rauschenberg, the state of California passed the Resale Royalties Act in 1977. At a Federal level, the United States Congress has shown some reluctance in providing national recognition for a right of resale in the United States. A number of other European countries have established a right of resale. In 2001, the European Council adopted the Artists' Resale directive and recognised that the 'artist's resale right forms an integral part of copyright and is an essential prerogative for authors.' In 2006, the United Kingdom promulgated regulations, giving effect to a right of resale in that jurisdiction. However, a number of Latin American and African countries have established a right of resale. The New Zealand Parliament has debated a bill on a right of resale.

Damned to fame: The moral rights of the Beckett estate

The Company B production of Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot raises important questions about copyright law, moral rights, and dramatic works. The playwright's nephew and executor, Edward Beckett, threatened to bring a legal action against the Sydney company for breach of contract on the grounds that unauthorised music appeared in the production. The Company B production denied that the contract made any such express provisions. The director Neil Armfield complained: 'In coming here with its narrow prescriptions, its dead controlling hand, the Beckett estate seems to me to be the enemy of art'. In the biography Damned to fame, James Knowlson documents a number of other proceedings taken by Beckett and his agents to control the productions of his work: 'He was often represented as a tyrannical figure, an arch-controller of his work, ready to unleash fiery thunderbolts onto the head of any bold, innovative director, unwilling to follow his text and stage directions to the last counted dot and precisely timed pause.' However, Knowlson notes that Beckett was inconsistent in his willingness to use legal action: 'It made a tremendous difference if he liked and respected the persons involved or if he had been able to listen to their reasons for wanting to attempt something highly innovative or even slightly different'. Famously, in 1988, Beckett brought legal action against a Dutch theatre company, which wanted to stage a production of Waiting for Godot, with women acting all the roles. His lawyer argued that the integrity of the text was violated because actresses were substituted for the male actors asked for in the text. The judge in the Haarlem court ruled that the integrity of the play had not been violated, because the performance showed fidelity to the dialogue and the stage directions of the play. By contrast, in 1992, a French court held a stage director was liable for an infringement of Beckett's moral right of integrity because the director had staged Waiting for Godot with the two lead roles played by women. In 1998, a United States production of Waiting for Godot with a racially mixed cast attracted legal threats amid accusations it had 'injected race into the play'. In the 2000 New York Fringe Festival, a company made light of this ongoing conflict between the Beckett estate and artistic directors. The work was entitled: The complete lost works of Samuel Beckett as found in an envelope (partially burned) in a dustbin in Paris labelled 'Never to be performed. Never. Ever. EVER! Or I'll sue! I'LL SUE FROM THE GRAVE!'. The plot concerned a fight between three producers and the Beckett estate. In the wake of such disputes, Beckett and later his estate sought to tighten production contracts to state that no additions, omissions or alterations should be made to the text of the play or the stage directions and that no music, special effects or other supplements should be added without prior consent.

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

Evolution of the concept of compulsory licensing: A critical analysis of key developments before and after TRIPS

Patents provide monopoly rights to patent holders. There are safeguards in patent regime to ensure that exclusive right of the patent holder is not misused. Compulsory licensing is one of the safeguards provided under TRIPS using which patent granting state may allow a third party to exploit the invention without patent holder’s consent upon terms and conditions decided by the government. This concept existed since 1623 and was not introduced by TRIPS for the first time. But this mechanism has undergone significant changes especially in post-TRIPS era. History of evolution of compulsory licensing is one of the least explored areas of intellectual property law. This paper undertakes an analysis of different phases in the evolution of the compulsory licensing mechanism and sheds light on reasons behind developments especially after TRIPS.

The challenges of Weibo for data-driven digital media research

Data generated via user activity on social media platforms is routinely used for research across a wide range of social sciences and humanities disciplines. The availability of data through the Twitter APIs in particular has afforded new modes of research, including in media and communication studies; however, there are practical and political issues with gaining access to such data, and with the consequences of how that access is controlled. In their paper ‘Easy Data, Hard Data’, Burgess and Bruns (2015) discuss both the practical and political aspects of Twitter data as they relate to academic research, describing how communication research has been enabled, shaped and constrained by Twitter’s “regimes of access” to data, the politics of data use, and emerging economies of data exchange. This conceptual model, including the ‘easy data, hard data’ formulation, can also be applied to Sina Weibo. In this paper, we build on this model to explore the practical and political challenges and opportunities associated with the ‘regimes of access’ to Weibo data, and their consequences for digital media and communication studies. We argue that in the Chinese context, the politics of data access can be even more complicated than in the case of Twitter, which makes scientific research relying on large social data from this platform more challenging in some ways, but potentially richer and more rewarding in others.

Workplace acceptance and experiences of LGBTIQ health professionals: A systematic literature review

Background The purpose of this study was to explore the workplace acceptance and experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) paramedics. Methods A systematic search of academic databases and reference lists from selected papers were the sources of the data. Inclusion criteria were research papers published in English, which focused on workplace acceptance and experiences of LGBTIQ health personnel. Results The initial focus of this systematic review was the workplace acceptance and experiences of LGBTIQ paramedics. However due to no published research specific to the paramedic profession the scope of the review was broadened to include of all LGBTIQ health personnel. Thirty-three papers were included in this review. Evidence indicated that LGBTIQ health professionals experienced discrimination from their patients, heterosexual colleagues and ‘closeted’ LGBTIQ peers. Positive contribution of LGBTIQ health professionals include improved patient care and role models for LGBTIQ peers. Inclusive policy is required for LGBTIQ health professional workforce retention. Conclusions The paramedic workforce is known to be a high risk occupational group for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Theoretically, LGBTIQ paramedics working in a heteronormative culture experience increased level of stress. While LGBTIQ health professionals receive legislative protection against discrimination, discrimination still exists in practice through lack of visibility. Effective and efficient integration of LGBTIQ health professionals could improve workplace satisfaction, workforce retention, and equity of access by marginalised groups. An inclusive workplace policy of LGBTIQ embraces and celebrates the value of diversity.