Suchergebnisse

U.S. privacy law often is criticized in comparison with international privacy regimes, particularly the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation. Parts of this criticism are fair, but, at the same time, U.S. privacy law provides meaningful protections in a substantial set of circumstances, and, on occasion, provides either "better" privacy protection than the GDPR or presents a more targeted approach to balancing appropriate privacy protections with other important public policy concerns. This balancing often is not a question of "consumers vs. industry" (although it certainly can be). In some situations—particularly in the health care settings that I will focus on—it often is a question of providing an appropriate balance between privacy interests and other policy interests that benefit both industry and consumers.

Digital health in the United States is rapidly and continuously evolving to enhance patient care and revolutionize health care delivery. This technology offers substantial promise to both patients and providers, but lacks a comprehensive regulatory structure to ensure adequate safety and privacy. While the Department of Health and Human Services, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Federal Trade Commission regulate portions of the digital health industry, their oversight is incomplete, with numerous digital health companies falling between the cracks and assuming an unregulated status. This article analyzes the state of digital health legal and regulatory oversight in the United States, discusses how state legislatures and industry organizations have worked to fill existing legal gaps, and presents strategies for encouraging compliance for unregulated entities.