Minnesota Law Review

HIPAA-Cratic or HIPAA-Critical: U.S. Privacy Protections Should Be Guaranteed By Covered Entities Working Abroad

Clinical research has increasingly moved outside of U.S. borders sparking debate over the legal and ethical requirements for clinical researchers and research sponsors conducting studies overseas. Parallel to overseas research expansion, privacy and privacy rights in healthcare are being recognized as fundamental rights. The strength of privacy protections is being tested as medical records are increasingly electronic and transferable. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was promulgated to ensure privacy of medical records, but the regulations are unclear concerning whether those privacy protections apply to research subjects participating in American studies conducted abroad. As overseas research expands, and medical records privacy becomes more important, so does the necessity of resolving this confusion. This Note argues for guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services clarifying that HIPAA does apply to a covered entity whether they are working in the United States or abroad.
While this regulatory requirement faces barriers, these barriers can be mitigated. The ethical argument in favor of implementing HIPAA abroad demonstrates that privacy protections are a necessary part of all human subjects research. The government must respond to this gap by expanding privacy protections.

:: View PDF

De Novo

  • Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte

    EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit.[1] Although the case presented many serious [...]

  • Revisiting Water Bankruptcy

    REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself[1]—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water [...]

  • Defying Auer Deference

    DEFYING AUER DEFERENCE: SKIDMORE AS A SOLUTION TO CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS IN PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION Nicholas R. Bednar, Volume 100, Lead Articles Editor* On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.[1]F The Court overturned the D.C. [...]