Do not include policy positions as conformance statements 3

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive
    • Priority: Highest
    • US Da Vinci HRex (FHIR)
    • current
    • Clinical Interoperability Council
    • Security and Privacy
    • 5.1.5 Statutes, Regulations, and Guiding Principles
    • Hide

      We have raised this issue with FMG and US-Realm and both have agreed that it is permissible to use conformance language (i.e. SHALL/SHOULD/MAY) when referring to content outside the scope of rules defined by the IG itself. Given that this language has undergone considerable review and discussion with groups inside and outside HL7 and the community was comfortable with the language, we do not see a good reason to relax or change it at this time.

      Show
      We have raised this issue with FMG and US-Realm and both have agreed that it is permissible to use conformance language (i.e. SHALL/SHOULD/MAY) when referring to content outside the scope of rules defined by the IG itself. Given that this language has undergone considerable review and discussion with groups inside and outside HL7 and the community was comfortable with the language, we do not see a good reason to relax or change it at this time.
    • Marti Velezis / James Tcheng : 6-0-1

      This IG can't make a policy position or interpretation of the law into a HL7 Conformance Statement. Please refrain from mixing implementation conformance with IG specific policy stances for the following reasons:
      *This is not part of HL7 Conformance methodology, because it is not testable given the standards included in this IG. If this IG were to make testable computable capabilities to adequately support the consent and data sharing policies of trading partners involved in the exchange that are more protective so long as policies are consistent with or more restrictive than Federal and State law, it would need to include standards that support these capabilities.
      *If this policy stance were adopted as a conformance statement, it has the potential to influence how developers implement this IG at the peril of their legal departments, and might run afoul of the policy positions of other HL7 community member and HL7 leadership, which would likely prefer that implementable HL7 standards' conformance statements remain policy agnostic.
      Instead, this IG should strongly encourage implementers to consult with their legal counsel about whether their implementations adequately support adequately support the consent and data sharing policies of trading partners involved in the exchange that are more protective so long as policies are consistent with or more restrictive than Federal and State law.

      Existing Wording:

      All IGs and implementations SHOULD support the consent and data sharing policies of trading partners involved in the exchange that are more protective so long as policies are consistent with or more restrictive than Federal and State statutes and regulations.

      Proposed Wording:

      All implementers of any Da Vinci FHIR Implementation Guides (IG) are strongly encouraged to consult with their legal counsel about whether their implementations adequately support the consent and data sharing policies of trading partners involved in the exchange that are more protective so long as policies are consistent with or more restrictive than Federal and State law.

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Kathleen Connor
            Kathleen Connor
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: