The Data Protection Act, 1998 Essay

Confidentiality applies to the children act in many ways it protects children and young peoples information from being put into the wrong hands although the children act does state that the person can obtain the information being held themselves as because of data protection you have the right to access your own files.

This is the act that the British parliament passed on the 2nd of December 1997 and in July 1998 it received royal assent.

This is the act that the British parliament passed on the 2nd of December 1997 and in July 1998 it received royal assent.

When comparing the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, both have privacy and security rule,

Legislation is put in place to ensure the convention happens. Legislation is a set of laws passed by parliament. If these laws are broken, the individual that has done so may be charged with the crime.

According to Dictionary.com confidentiality is “the right of an individual to have personal, identifiable medical information kept private.” The definition for this term is widely known in health care, but when it is applied to adolescents many people do not understand the basics. Doctors are responsible for informing adolescent patients and their parents the privacy a minor is given according to federal and state laws, but in some cases doctors fail to do so. This results in the misunderstanding of minor’s privacy rights, which can lead to the adolescent patient not disclosing significant information, and the parents assuming they have the right to all of their child’s medical records. Because of this, it is important for adolescents and their parents to understand the nature of confidentiality in health care.

Privacy practices have changed over time. Lewis Maltby is president of the National Workrights Institute (formerly the ACLU’s national employment rights project). He has been consulted by the sponsors of every major congressional privacy bill since 1990 and has testified before Congress numerous times (Maltby, L. 2016). He feels that the battle of workplace privacy is over and he feels that privacy is lost and it is no longer in the workplace. Maltby states that Since 1990, three attempts have been made to enact federal privacy legislation. The first was the proposed Privacy for Consumers and Workers Act (PCWA). PCWA would have required employers to fully disclose all monitoring programs to employees and provide the employee and the customer immediate notice when a specific telephone call was being monitored. PCWA was passed by the House Labor Committee but was not brought up for a vote. The Senate version had almost no cosponsors, even though the Senate was heavily Democratic, and was never brought up in Committee (Maltby, L. 2016).

Privacy has been a thing for consideration ever since the early days and has even become more worrisome recently with the evolvement of information technology. Individuals around the world value their privacy and the protection of their personal information. Having a knowledge of who is accessing their information and what it is being used for. But with the recent and rapid evolvement of IT, information privacy is being threatened and individuals no longer possess the control over who has access to their information or what their information is being used for. Taherdoost et al. defined privacy as the claim of individuals to determine for themselves when to, to whom, and to what extent individually identified data about them is communicated or used (2013, p. 147). Taherdoost et al. further went on to discuss that privacy invasions are usually not that dramatic or noticeable as it creeps up on us and might take a while before realizing that your information is being collected and used for different purposes you have no idea about.

The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was designed to harmonize the data privacy laws across Europe. This is mainly done to protect and empower the EU citizens data privacy and to reshape the way organizations approach data privacy. Let’s understand the requirements of Europe’s GDPR privacy and how it affects US companies.

To analyse the Act’s significance I have looked at the position prior to the Act and what the Act changed, before moving on to examining and critically

The organisation revolves around data protection. Not only is it bound by law through the Data Protection Act 1998 by providing services such as Data Supply, Data Cleansing and Lead Generation, everyone who deals with any form of sensitive data within the organisation has to abide by these regulations. Any breach could lead to a damaging reputation and a considerable penalty for the organisation and a severe punishment for the individual who breached it. There is, however, the issue of ethics in sales, which, after time, become prominent and almost commonplace. Its rather easy to assume that the ‘big hitters’ i.e. the 30-40DD per month agents are simply achieving because of the skill and experience that they have accumulated over the years, but this may not necessarily be the case. “The practices and activities that are considered to be importantly right or wrong, together with the rules that govern those activities and the values to which those activities relate,” (Mullins, Christy, 2013). Mullins goes on to discuss the importance of how an organisation’s core values and ideology that determine how it operates and this generally helps to guide how individuals within the organisation will subsequently behave. He also discusses the idea of ‘intelligent self-interested companies’ and how they may seek out taking a principled stance on a particular issue such as Astute and the issue of Data Protection and how it handles it in order to maximise value for the

In 1995 Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom, Greece, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland enacted a legislation to protect personal data privacy in the form of the EU Data Protection Directive. According to this document, companies operating inside European Union are not permitted to transfer any personal data to countries outside European Economic Area unless countries in question can guarantee adequate levels of protection of that data. This created many concerns for global companies and raised legal issues and thus in summer 2000 the US Department of Commerce and the European Commission formulated the ‘safe harbour agreement’ that circumscribes the level of protection to be given to European personal information. The arrangement is designed to guarantee the safety of online data transfers between the EU and the US, as stipulated by the EU Data Protection Directive of 1998. In addition, US companies aiming at entering the online markets in Europe would need to achieve ‘safe harbour’ status. However, in 6 October 2015 Court of Justice of the European Union declared that the Commission’s Safe Harbour Decision is now invalid, more precisely that the United States cannot adequately ensure protection of European personal data. Before discussing any implications of this ruling there’s a need to know why Court of Justice of the European Union made it.

One came to discretion, albeit the current regimes of data protection and freedom of expression have developed in symbiosis with principles referring to one another, the interpretations of European courts and DPAs shows that this attempt to harmonise is not always unanimous arising from the strictly conclusive interpretations of the CJEU and the obscurity of domestic data protection provisions providing potential grounds for actual balancing.

Today, there are many threats to information systems and the information contain contained on the servers by customers and employees. There are major privacies issues facing organizations from hackers, employees, natural disasters, and other threats. Some of the privacies issues can be risk to the sporting goods store and justify the concerns of the CEO. There are security risks and application laws which governs the privacy risks. Security measures can be implement by organizations which can mitigate the risk to private information.

In today’s advanced world of technology, valuable information holds the same amount of worth that of new world currency. Since information is highly important, it is crucial that it remains secured. This is ultimately covered by data security and privacy. Online data is a hacker’s dream, as it holds the ultimate value of materials for these cybercriminals. For example, on a broader scale, banking information can be worth over a thousand dollars depending on the account balance. If cybercriminals get a hold of these information’s, it can be costly for businesses. On a smaller scale, for a small business, customer information theft can paralyze operations and even put a company out of business. In order to prevent these crimes, there are nine important data security policies that starts with ensuring data security accountability, policies that govern network services, scanning for vulnerabilities, managing patches, system data security policies, the response to incidents, acceptable use, monitoring compliance, and account monitoring and control.