Critically Rethinking the Right Not to Know: Legal Ambiguity and Theoretical Fragility
Abbas Mirshekari & Jamshid Zargari
What the paper says
In an era marked by unprecedented access to information and rapid advancements in health care technologies, the Right Not to Know (RNTK) has emerged as a key yet contentious concept within legal discourses. RNTK grants individuals the capacity to refuse knowledge about their health care or genetic profile, thereby strengthening personal autonomy and self-determination. This right is increasingly incorporated into international legal frameworks and human rights principles as a protection against paternalistic tendencies in health care and the overwhelming flood of contemporary data. Despite this development, its legal enforcement remains inconsistent, situated in a regulatory grey zone characterised by uncertainty and diverse interpretations. Theoretically, RNTK’s validity is both supported and challenged. The current study employs a thorough examination of these aspects to evaluate whether RNTK represents an established right in the field of human rights or a contentious right in international and domestic law, especially Australia. This analysis aims to clarify its broader implications for societies.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.