United States still no closer to database legislation

Last year European Intellectual Property Review published an article comparing the latest version of the proposed US database legislation, the Collections of Information Antipiracy Bill with the UK's Copyright and Rights in Database Regulations 1997. Subsequently a new US Bill, the Consumer and Investor Access to Information Act has emerged, the Antipiracy Bill has been amended and much debate has occurred, but the US seems no closer to enacting database legislation. This article briefly outlines the background to the US legislative efforts, examines the two Bills and draws some comparisons with the UK Regulations. A study of the US Bills clearly demonstrates the starkly divided opinion on database protection held by the Bills' proponents and the principal lobby groups driving the legislative efforts: the Antipiracy Bill is very protective of database producers' interests, whereas the Access Bill is heavily user-oriented. If the US experience is any indication there will be a long horizon involved in achieving any consensus on international harmonisation of this difficult area.

Adults who lack capacity : substitute decision-making

• Mechanisms to facilitate consent to healthcare for adults who lack capacity are necessary to ensure that these adults can lawfully receive appropriate medical treatment when needed. • In Australia, the common law plays only a limited role in this context, through its recognition of advance directives and through the parens patriae jurisdiction of superior courts. • Substitute decision-making for adults who lack capacity is facilitated primarily by guardianship and other related legislation. This legislation, which has been enacted in all Australian States and Territories, permits a range of decision-makers to make different types of healthcare decisions. • Substitute decision-makers can be appointed by the adult or by a guardianship or other tribunal. Where there is no appointed decision-maker, legislation generally empowers those close to the adult to make the relevant decision. Most Australian jurisdictions have also provided for statutory advance directives. • For the most serious of decisions, such as non-therapeutic sterilisations, consent can only be provided by a Tribunal. Other decisions can generally be made by a range of substitute decision-makers. Some treatment, such as very minor treatment or that which is needed in an emergency, can be provided without consent. • Guardianship legislation generally establishes a set of principles and/or other criteria to guide healthcare decisions. Mechanisms to resolve disputes as to who is the appropriate decision-maker and how a decision should be made have also been established.

Securing medical research data with a rights management system

We propose a digital rights management approach for sharing electronic health records for research purposes and argue advantages of the approach. We give an outline of our implementation, discuss challenges that we faced and future directions.

Announcement and legislation enactment improve children’s seating position in regional areas

New legislation requires all children 7 years and younger to use child-specific Australian Standards approved restraints suitable to their age and restricts seating young children in the front of cars. Observations of child seating position and restraint use were undertaken in Toowoomba and Rockhampton before the Queensland legislation was announced (T1), after the announcement but before it was enacted (T2) and after it came into force (T3). From T1 to T2, the percentage of children seated in the rear increased (69% to 75%), with a further increase from T2 to T3 (75% to 77%). This pattern was clear when there were one or two children in the car, but not when there were 3 or more. The effect on restraint use was more complex. After the announcement (T2) the percentage of children using adult seatbelts significantly increased regardless of the number of child passengers. However, once the legislation was enacted (T3) there was a significant increase in the percentage of children using child seats/boosters where there was one or two child passengers. Where there were three or more children in the vehicle there was little change in restraint choice between pre (T1) and post (T3) legislation.

Using digital rights management for securing data in a medical research environment

We propose a digital rights management approach for sharing electronic health records in a health research facility and argue advantages of the approach. We also give an outline of the system under development and our implementation of the security features and discuss challenges that we faced and future directions.

Children and consent to medical treatment

This chapter deals with the law concerning children and consent to medical treatment. Where a child under the age of 18 requires medical treatment, issues arise as to who may lawfully consent to the treatment and under what circumstances. Depending on the circumstances, consent may be given by the child’s parent or guardian; the child; or a court. The chapter provides a thorough treatment of Australian law about these issues and circumstances.

Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia

This article examines Finnis' and Keown's claim that the intention/foresight distinction should be used as the basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawing medical treatment, rather than the act/omission distinction which is currently used. I argue that whilst the intention/foresight distinction is sound and can apply to palliative pain relief hastening death, it cannot be applied to withholding and withdrawing medical treatment. Instead, the act/omission distinction remains the better basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawal, and law reform is consequently unnecessary.

Recent developments : loss of chance in medical litigation : Tabet v Gett [2010] HCA 12.

Following the judgement of the High Court in Tabet v Gett [2010]HCA 12 handed down on 21 April 2010 it appears that in Australia there is now very limited scope for recovery in negligence for the loss of a chance of a better medical outcome.

Proof of causation in informed consent cases : establishing what the plaintiff would have done

A degree of judicial caution in accepting the assertion of a plaintiff as to what he or she would have done, if fully informed of risks, is clearly evident upon a review of decisions applying the common law. Civil liability legislation in some jurisdictions now precludes assertion evidence by a plaintiff. Although this legislative change was seen as creating a significant challenge for plaintiffs seeking to discharge the onus of proof of establishing causation in such cases, recent decisions suggest a more limited practical effect. While a plaintiff’s ex post facto assertions as to what he or she would have done if fully informed of risks may now be inadmissible, objective and subjective evidence as to the surrounding facts and circumstances, in particular the plaintiff’s prior attitudes and conduct, and the assertion evidence of others remains admissible. Given the court’s reliance on both objective and subjective evidence, statistical evidence may be of increasing importance.