Australia’s national privacy regulator recently confirmed that clinicians may contact a patient’s relatives about possible inherited genetic risks – with the patient’s consent – without breaching privacy laws.
The move comes after a concerted effort by Monash University public health genomics ethical, legal and social adviser Dr Jane Tiller sought clarification on the matter.
Her new paper published in the Medical Journal of Australia (MJA), details the discretion available to clinicians.
Dr Tiller said letting family members know about their genetic risks was critical, especially for conditions where actions could be taken to prevent disease, such as some cancers or heart disease.
“Individuals cannot make informed decisions about whether to have genetic testing if they are not aware of their possible risk,” she said.
“But doctors worry about the privacy implications of helping patients notify their relatives by contacting them directly.
RELATED: Rare disease network to transform lives
“Even though this discretion has been available to them for many years under the Privacy Act 1988 (Commonwealth), many clinicians remain unclear about when and how they can act – even when patients consent and provide their relatives’ contact details.”
In 2024, following years of research and public discourse, Dr Tiller sought advice from the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) – Australia’s national privacy regulator – about how the Privacy Act applied to the notification of at-risk relatives with patient consent.
Recognising the importance of genetic risk communication for disease prevention, the OAIC updated its online guide to health privacy in May 2025 to clarify that clinicians may legally collect relatives’ contact details from patients and use those to contact at-risk relatives with patient consent.
RELATED: Importance of genetic counselling
“I am so grateful for the OAIC’s responsiveness to the need for clarification in this rapidly evolving area,” Dr Tiller said.
“This confirmation is incredibly useful for clinicians, who will now have the confidence and clarity to use their discretion when helping patients communicate genetic risk information to their families.”
This guidance clarifies the discretion available to clinicians who are subject to the Commonwealth Privacy Act – primarily those who work in private practice.
State and Territory privacy regulations also apply to clinicians working in public hospitals and institutions.
“I have previously published an analysis of all the State and Territory privacy regulations, and in my view all of them contain provisions that work the same way as the Commonwealth law,” Dr Tiller, who is a lawyer as well as a genetic counsellor and public health researcher said.
“The next step is for the State and Territory privacy regulators to follow the OAIC in confirming this interpretation, to give clinicians complete clarity and confidence.”
Medical Forum has contacted WA’s Office of the Information Commissioner about the matter but is yet to receive clarification.
The Medical Journal of Australia editor-in-chief, Virginia Barbour, said: “This guidance will help clinicians navigate how at-risk relatives can be adequately informed of serious genetic risk and is much needed, given current misunderstanding surrounding this practice in Australia.”
Want more news, clinicals, features and guest columns delivered straight to you? Subscribe for free to WA’s only independent magazine for medical practitioners.
Want to submit an article? Email editor@mforum.com.au