Directive

About: Directive is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5695 publications have been published within this topic receiving 56084 citations.

Advance directives. Why community-based older adults do not discuss their wishes.

Abstract: Health care providers and family members need direction when making health decisions for individuals who are unable. Advance directives allow individuals to maintain control of health care decisions. Despite that the majority of the population supports the right to express wishes related to end-of-life care, few implement advance directives. The purpose of this study was to determine reasons why community-based older adults discuss, do not discuss, or formalize advance directives. A convenience sample of 55 adults age 50 or older, participated in the study by answering a 31-question self-report questionnaire. Death or serious illness of a loved one was the most influential factor prompting formulation of an advance directive. However, the majority of the population has not expressed their health care wishes in the form of advance directives. Therefore, continuing to educate and encourage discussion of advance directives is imperative.

Country Report South Africa

Abstract: This national report on South Africa deals with issues such as informed consent, the protection of persons who are incapable of giving legal consent to clinical trials and research, and the function and composition of research ethics committees. The report discusses relevant South African common-law and constitutional provisions, and critically analyses national legislation and draft regulations which, for the first time in South Africa’s legal history, attempt to provide comprehensively for research-related issues. The report concludes that although the EU Directive on the Implementation of Good Clinical Practice in the Conduct of Clinical Trials on Medicinal Products for Human Use of 4 April 2001 (Directive 2001/20 EC) has thus far had very little direct effect on South Africa, there are many points of similarity between the provisions of the directive and the ethical and legal provisions which obtain in South Africa (as at April 2009).

Data Protection by Design and by Default : Deciphering the EU’s Legislative Requirements

Abstract: In this paper, a critical examination is conducted of Article 25 of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation 2016/679). Bearing the title ‘data protection by design and by default’, Article 25 requires that core data protection principles be integrated into the design and development of systems for processing personal data. The paper outlines the rationale and legal heritage of Article 25, and shows how its provisions proffer considerably stronger support for data protection by design and by default than is the case under the 1995 Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC). The paper further shows that this strengthening of support is in keeping with jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Nonetheless, it is herein argued that Article 25 suffers from multiple flaws, in particular a lack of clarity over the parameters and methodologies for achieving its goals, a failure to communicate clearly and directly with those engaged in the engineering of information systems, and a failure to provide the necessary incentives to spur the ‘hardwiring’ of privacy-related interests. Taken together, these flaws will likely hinder the traction of Article 25 requirements on information systems development.

The European Commission's Opinions under Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive

Abstract: The contribution examines the Opinions which the European Commission has issued so far under Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43 (Habitats Directive). It examines Member States' reasoning for justifying the application of Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive in the light of the European Court of Justice rulings, and comes to the conclusion that probably not one of the cases submitted would have been accepted by the Court.