Privacy and Health Information Technology

The increased use of health information technology (health IT) is a common element of nearly every health reform proposal because it has the potential to decrease costs, improve health outcomes, coordinate care, and improve public health. However, it raises concerns about security and privacy of medical information. This paper examines some of the “gaps” in privacy protections that arise out of the current federal health privacy standard, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability (HIPAA) Privacy Rule, the main federal law which governs the use and disclosure of health information. Additionally, it puts forth a range of possible solutions, accompanied by arguments for and against each. The solutions provide some options for strengthening the current legal framework of privacy protections in order to build public trust in health IT and facilitate its use for health reform. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) enacted in February 2009 includes a number of changes to HIPAA and its regulations, and those changes are clearly noted among the list of solutions (and ARRA is indicated in the Executive Summary and paper where the Act has a relevant provision)

Legal Solutions in Health Reform: Privacy and Health Information Technology

Identifies gaps in the federal health privacy standard and proposes options for strengthening the legal framework for privacy protections in order to build public trust in health information technology. Presents arguments for and against each option

Twitter as a communications instrument to support the decision making process in UAE police

A thesis submitted to the University of Bedfordshire in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of PhilosophySocial media are increasingly becoming platforms of choice for communication among individuals and groups of the public, and hence organisations are interested in engaging with communities and the public through this form of media to gain intelligence from such engagements to support their decision making processes. Yet, organisations are missing on realising the potential value from using social media for this type of interaction and engagement, while paucity in research addressing practical ways to use social media communication in supporting decision making still persists. This research investigates and proposes a practical framework for using social media – specifically Twitter – as a communications instrument to support the decision making process in police organisations. The research design is based on developing and evaluating a proof of concept representing engagements between the United Arab Emirates (UAE) police as a case study of police organisations with communities and members of the public in the UAE. The proof of concept is designed based on comparing and contrasting current practices by the UAE police with models, trends, and practices discussed in related literature. The research uses the Grounded Theory methodology to guide sampling, data collection, and analysis. The contribution of the research is to both theory and practice. The research addresses a gap in the body of knowledge for a framework that guides the development of models, policies, and practices for the use of social media as a communication instrument to support decision making in governmental organisations, specifically the police. In addition, the framework offers practical insights to policy makers into using different social media to engage with the public in communication, interactions, and knowledge sharing, with the aim of supporting decision making

A Broader View of Perceived Risk during Internet Transactions

Ubiquitous networking facilitates Internet access across multiple network environments, whose value is tied directly to user perceptions of its ability to securely execute transactions. Prior research has cited awareness, trust, and risk as critical determinants of adoption but has failed to examine these factors as they relate to infrastructure and its provider. Because information in transit is at risk from a network environment’s vulnerabilities, we focus on the implications of such risk on Internet activities. We examine the multiple parties that must be trusted to complete and facilitate an online transaction. We propose that the user must trust not only the information recipient to act benevolently but also the technologies and organizations that facilitate the online exchange

Content Providers’ Secondary Liability: A Social Network Perspective

Recent technological developments allow Internet users to disseminate ideas to a large audience. These technological advances empower individuals and promote important social objectives. However, they also create a setting for speech-related torts, harm, and abuse. One legal path to deal with online defamation turns to the liability of online content providers who facilitate the harmful exchanges. The possibility of bringing them to remove defamatory content and collecting damages from them attracted a great deal of attention in scholarly work, court decisions, and regulations. Different countries established different legal regimes. The United States allows an extensive shield—an overall immunity, as it exempts the liability of content providers in speech torts. This policy is not adopted worldwide. The E.U. directive outlines a “notice-and-takedown” safe haven. Other countries, such as Canada, use common tort law practices. This Article criticizes all of these policy models for being either over or under inclusive. This Article makes the case for a context-specific regulatory regime. It identifies specific characteristics of different content providers with their own unique settings, which call for nuanced legal rules that shall provide an optimal liability regime. To that end, the Article sets forth an innovative taxonomy: it relies on sociological studies premised on network theory and analysis, which is neutral to technological advances. This framework distinguishes between different technological settings based on the strength of social ties formed in each context. The Article explains that the strength of such ties influences the social context of online interactions and flow of information. The strength of ties is the best tool for designing different liability regimes; such ties serve as a proxy for the severity of harm that defamatory online speech might cause, and the social norms that might mitigate or exacerbate speech-related harm. The proposed taxonomy makes it possible to apply a sociological analysis to legal policy and to outline modular rules for content providers’ liability at every juncture. This Article does so while taking into account basic principles of tort law, as well as freedom of speech, reputation, fairness, efficiency, and the importance of promoting innovation

Content Providers’ Secondary Liability: A Social Network Perspective

Recent technological developments allow Internet users to disseminate ideas to a large audience. These technological advances empower individuals and promote important social objectives. However, they also create a setting for speech-related torts, harm, and abuse. One legal path to deal with online defamation turns to the liability of online content providers who facilitate the harmful exchanges. The possibility of bringing them to remove defamatory content and collecting damages from them attracted a great deal of attention in scholarly work, court decisions, and regulations. Different countries established different legal regimes. The United States allows an extensive shield—an overall immunity, as it exempts the liability of content providers in speech torts. This policy is not adopted worldwide. The E.U. directive outlines a “notice-and-takedown” safe haven. Other countries, such as Canada, use common tort law practices. This Article criticizes all of these policy models for being either over or under inclusive. This Article makes the case for a context-specific regulatory regime. It identifies specific characteristics of different content providers with their own unique settings, which call for nuanced legal rules that shall provide an optimal liability regime. To that end, the Article sets forth an innovative taxonomy: it relies on sociological studies premised on network theory and analysis, which is neutral to technological advances. This framework distinguishes between different technological settings based on the strength of social ties formed in each context. The Article explains that the strength of such ties influences the social context of online interactions and flow of information. The strength of ties is the best tool for designing different liability regimes; such ties serve as a proxy for the severity of harm that defamatory online speech might cause, and the social norms that might mitigate or exacerbate speech-related harm. The proposed taxonomy makes it possible to apply a sociological analysis to legal policy and to outline modular rules for content providers’ liability at every juncture. This Article does so while taking into account basic principles of tort law, as well as freedom of speech, reputation, fairness, efficiency, and the importance of promoting innovation

I am not a bad friend for having boundaries: exploring the need for and creation of support boundaries in friendships

2022 Summer.Includes bibliographical references.Although research effectively depicts the benefits of social support and support recipient experiences, less scholarship explores discrepancies and challenges in supportive communication. This research study investigates support provider experiences and offers new insight for challenges that might arise in supportive contexts. Two primary goals motivated this research: understanding what conditions influence providers' need for support boundaries and what communicative strategies are utilized to create them. Qualitative research methods were utilized, and 22 semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted. Analysis of 865 pages of texts illustrates how various conditions, both personal and relational, drove providers to need support boundaries. Participants described four primary themes to explain their need for support boundaries: ineffective involvement, relational transgressions, protecting the self, and network negotiations. Various sub-themes were identified, and all participants detailed numerous conditions that contributed to their need for support boundaries. Participants utilized three central strategies to enact support boundaries with their friends: direct communication, indirect communication, and collaborative communication. The findings depict existing discrepancies between support provider and recipient needs, and that boundary creation, when enacted skillfully, is an effective way to protect themselves and the relationship. Ultimately, this exploratory study emphasizes the importance of support boundaries and positions boundary creation in supportive contexts as an enriched area for further investigation