How Indigenous communities in New Zealand are protecting their data.

Concerns about the ethical use of data, privacy, and data harms are front of mind in many jurisdictions as regulators move to impose tighter controls on data privacy and protection, and the use of artificial intelligence (AI). Although efforts to hold corporations to account for their deployment of data and data-driven technologies have been largely welcomed by academics and civil society, there is a growing recognition of the limits to individual data rights, given the capacity of tech giants to link, surveil, target, and make inferences about groups. Questions about whether collective data rights exist, and how they can be recognized and protected, have provided fertile ground for researchers but have yet to penetrate the broader discourse on data rights and regulation.

Adicciones y discapacidad: medidas adoptadas por la legislación para la protección en el ámbito personal y patrimonial / Addictions and disability: measures adopted by legislation for protection in the personal and property sphere

La adicción a medicamentos, alcohol o drogas puede provocar en la persona una discapacidad. En la actualidad, la legislación se ha orientado a adoptar una serie de medidas de apoyo para proteger a las personas con discapacidad, sea cual sea el motivo que les haya llevado a dicha situación, tanto en el ámbito personal como patrimonial. Ya no se habla de la incapacitación en la norma, y sí de diversas medidas a adoptar tanto en la Ley 41/2003, de 18 de noviembre, de protección patrimonial de las personas con discapacidad y de modificación del Código Civil, de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil y de la Normativa Tributaria con esta finalidad, como en la Ley 8/2021, de 2 de junio, por la que se reforma la legislación civil y procesal para el apoyo a las personas con discapacidad en el ejercicio de su capacidad jurídica. Dentro de estas medidas hay que diferenciar a la persona menor y al mayor de edad. El propósito de este estudio es analizar dichas medidas en relación con la discapacidad y la adicción, bien cuando la adicción determina una situación de discapacidad, como cuando la persona discapacitada tiene una adicción posterior con la finalidad de proteger tanto a la persona como a los bienes. (AU)

Addiction to medication, alcohol or drugs can cause a person to become disabled. Currently, legislation has been aimed at adopting a series of support measures to protect people with disabilities, whatever the reason that has led them to this situation, both in the personal and property spheres. The law no longer talks about incapacitation, but rather about various measures to be adopted both in Law 41/2003, of November 18, on the property protection of people with disabilities and on the modification of the Civil Code, the Law of Civil Prosecution and Tax Regulations for this purpose. as in Law 8/2021, of June 2, which reforms civil and procedural legislation to support people with disabilities in the exercise of their legal capacity. Within these measures, it is necessary to differentiate between the minor and the adult. The purpose of this study is to analyze these measures in relation to disability and addiction, either when the addiction determines a situation of disability, or when the disabled person has a subsequent addiction in order to protect both the person and the property. (AU)

Abortion as a matter of Human Rights

Para garantizar la igualdad real, la autonomía, la libertad y el derecho a la autodeterminación reproductiva, es imperativo que los estados aseguren el derecho a determinar libre y responsablemente el número deseado de hijos. La penalización total del aborto es incompatible con los sistemas jurídicos constitucionales, ya que ignora la garantía de protección de los derechos humanos, imponiendo una carga injusta e indefendible a las mujeres vulnerables. Este artículo examina los elementos que sustentan un enfoque jurídico restrictivo de los derechos reproductivos. Se centra en las nociones cruciales de autonomía reproductiva y autodeterminación y su lugar en el marco de los derechos reproductivos. Estos derechos se consideran derechos humanos y se delimitan las correspondientes responsabilidades de los Estados. (AU)

To ensure genuine equality, autonomy, freedom, and the right to reproductive self-determination, it is imperative for nations to ensure the right to freely and responsibly determine the desired number of children. The complete criminalization of abortion is incompatible with constitutional legal systems as it ignores the assurance of human rights protection, placing an unfair and indefensible burden on vulnerable women. This article examines the elements upholding a legal approach that restricts reproductive rights. It centers on the crucial notions of reproductive autonomy and self-determination and their place in the reproductive rights framework. These rights are regarded as human rights, outlining States’ corresponding responsibilities. (AU)

Death by Detox: Substance Withdrawal, a Possible Death Row for Individuals in Custody.

Suffering through substance withdrawal is a major problem for the majority of individuals in custody, yet there are no guidelines or standards to ensure their safety. Instead, individuals in custody are having their Constitutional rights violated and many die at the hands of the justice system. When their families seek accountability for the lack of adequate care provided by correctional facilities and employees, families are faced with a lack of consistency from one circuit to the next for knowing as to the correct standard to have a successful claim. Strain v. Regalado was a chance for the Supreme Court to address this issue, but by denying cert in that case, the Court has signed off on the injustice these individuals face. This note proposed having the subjective prong for the deliberate indifference claim for inadequate medical care for withdrawal for individuals in custody presumed. Allowing the subjective prong to be presumed better aligns with the reality of this issue because correctional officers see many inmates suffering withdrawal and the symptoms which indicate the need for medical intervention are similar to those that would indicate a medical need in any other situation. Additionally, correctional officers are purportedly held to a higher standard. This note then proposed a federal standard for claims and medical care. These are both basic rights in the United States, unless and until a person is in custody.

For Health Equity, We Must End Mass Incarceration.

This Viewpoint discusses the health harms to individuals and communities because of mass incarceration in the US and proposes interventions to ensure health equity for all individuals.

[Rights and protection of the child victim of domestic violence]. / Droit et protection de l'enfant victime de violences conjugales.

Today, domestic violence is no longer seen as a matter for the couple. It is just as much a concern for children who are exposed to it, given the consequences it has for them. French law has taken up this issue by attempting to protect minors from violent situations while adequately punishing the perpetrator. The objective of the law is thus to put the child, a vulnerable person, at the center of the system.

Cruzan after Dobbs: What Remains of the Constitutional Right to Refuse Treatment?

In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court removed constitutional protection from the individual's right to end a pregnancy. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Court invalidated previous rulings protecting that right as part of the individual liberty and privacy interests embedded in the U.S. Constitution. Now, many observers are speculating about the fate of other rights founded on those interests. The Dobbs ruling conflicts with the Court's 1990 Cruzan decision restricting the government's power to interfere with personal medical choices. The language and reasoning in Dobbs and Cruzan offer guidance on how the Court might address future cases involving the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment. The decisions also point to policy strategies for preserving that right.

Biological samples taken from Native American Ancestors are human remains under NAGPRA.

In the United States, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) provides a specific framework for the disposition of Native American Ancestral remains within its purview. However, samples such as a bone fragment, tooth, or other biological tissue taken from the remains of these Ancestors have been treated by institutions and researchers as independent of the individual from whom they were removed and used in destructive research such as paleogenomic and other archaeometric analyses without consultation, consent, and collaboration from Native American communities; are not cared for in keeping with the current best practices for Indigenous Ancestors; and are not likely to be repatriated to their communities. Here, we demonstrate that any biological samples removed from Ancestors who are covered under NAGPRA must also be handled according to the stipulations defined for "human remains" within the legislation. As such, we are not proposing a change to existing legislation, but rather best practices, specific to the context of the United States and NAGPRA, relating to the use of and care for biological samples taken from Native American Ancestors.

Pulse Oximeters and Violation of Federal Antidiscrimination Law.

This Viewpoint discusses how some pulse oximeters can provide incorrect oxygen saturation data for dark-skinned patients compared with light-skinned patients, describes the reasons that biased oximeters remained in use, and highlights why a rule recently proposed by the US Department of Health and Human Services may bring about needed change in the use of pulse oximetry for patients with dark skin.

Thurgood Marshall, Hero of American Medicine.

One of the heroes in American history, Associate Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall (1908-1993) sought legal remedies against racial discrimination in education and health care. As director of the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) of NAACP from 1940 to 1961, his success in integrating law schools in Texas led to the first black medical student admitted to a state medical school in the South. Representing doctors and dentists needing a facility to perform surgery, the LDF brought cases before the courts in North Carolina that moved the country toward justice in health care. His ultimate legal victory came in 1954, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the decision that declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. In 1964, the LDF under Jack Greenberg, Marshall's successor as director, won Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital, a decision that held that hospitals accepting federal funds had to admit black patients. The two decisions laid the judicial foundation for the laws and administrative acts that changed America's racial history, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Social Security Act Amendments of 1965 that established Medicare and Medicaid. His achievements came during the hottest period of the American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Well past the middle of the twentieth century, black Americans were denied access to the full resources of American medicine, locked in a "separate-but-equal" system woefully inadequate in every respect. In abolishing segregation, Marshall initiated the long overdue remedy of the unjust legacies of slavery and Jim Crow.