Critically Rethinking the Right Not to Know: Legal Ambiguity and Theoretical Fragility

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.