The right to privacy in Danish healthcare

The scope of this paper is to assess the growing digitalization of personal information in healthcare and the ethical challenges this development poses to the citizen. Specifically the paper discusses the right to privacy in a Danish context, namely in relation to the use of The Shared Medical Record. The Shared Medical Record is a default digital health record consisting of every patient's medical history for the previous two years, accessible to a broad range of health professionals in Denmark. In this paper we discuss three aspects of The Shared Medical Record, primarily from a normative point of view: 1) Are the personal data shared by The Shared Medical Record relevant and appropriate? 2) Is the distribution of this information to the current array of health professionals appropriate? And 3) Does The Shared Medical Record adequately support and account for the quorum and autonomy of the individual citizen with regards to personal information? We argue that, advantages such as heightened security, efficiency and convenience aside, the citizens' right to privacy is to some extent compromised by the terms and use of this record. The citizen is not extensively informed on the use of the record, and does not hold a sufficient degree of autonomy over the content and distribution of their personal data. The primary ethical perspective of the paper is deontological, but in order to properly nuance our stance we have chosen to include traditionally utilitarian points of view throughout our discussions. In the paper we introduce Helen Nissenbaum's notion of contextual integrity in order to thoroughly assess the service's ethical implications for Danish citizens and their future privacy, as well as points from John Rawls, Tom L. Beauchamp and James F. Childress.