Published Date: 12.11.2026

Individual Mental Privacy in the Digitalization of Mental Health Care

Annotation

The digitalization of mental health care generates new ways of recording and processing information about an individual's mental state, which reveals a mismatch between the sensitivity of such information and the scope of its legal protection: existing regulation links the extent of safeguards primarily to the manner in which information is obtained and the legal status of the entity processing it, whereas the degree of interference with private life is determined by the content of the information itself and its capacity to reveal an individual's inner mental sphere. Drawing on Russian legislation and legal scholarship, the article substantiates the independent significance of mental privacy as a legal category defining the content and limits of an individual's right to protection of the inner mental sphere; criteria are proposed for determining when information falls within this sphere, and it is established that the regimes of medical confidentiality and personal data protection do not exhaust the mechanisms of its legal protection. The need for additional safeguards in the digital processing of such information is substantiated, including requirements concerning the disclosure of information to the individual, the purposes and duration of data use, and the conditions of third-party access.




Library

1. Бояринова В.И. Правовые гарантии соблюдения врачебной тайны при передаче информации для обработки системам искусственного интеллекта / В.И. Бояринова // Юридический мир. 2026. № 4. С. 31–34. DOI: 10.18572/1811-1475-2026-4-31-34.
2. Кравец И.А. Бионейроконституционализм и достоинство: теоретические основы, диалог этических и юридических требований и перспективы взаимодействия (часть II) / И.А. Кравец // Журнал российского права. 2022. Т. 26. № 6. С. 5–31. DOI: 10.12737/jrl.2022.059.
3. Кравец И.А. Когнитивная свобода, формирование нейроправ человека и взаимодействие нейробиологии и публичного права (теоретические, правовые и сравнительные аспекты) / И.А. Кравец, Г.Б. Романовский // Вестник Томского государственного университета. 2024. №
4. Крылатова И.Ю. Значение конституционной категории достоинства личности в биоэтике и медицине / И.Ю. Крылатова // Актуальные проблемы российского права. 2022. Т. 17. № 10 (143). С. 46–53.
5. Михайлова О.Р. Факторы доверия цифровым платформам оказания психологической помощи: обзор литературы / О.Р. Михайлова, Е.В. Фомичева, Ж. Жыргалбек кызы // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. 2024. Т. 27. № 2. С. 179–210. DOI: 10.31119/jssa.2024.2
6. Chivilgina, O. eHealth interventions for psychiatry in Switzerland and Russia: a comparative study / O. Chivilgina, B.S. Elger, I. Fedotov, F. Jotterand // Frontiers in Digital Health. 2024. Vol. 5. Art. 1278176. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1278176.
7. Ienca, M. Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology / M. Ienca, R. Andorno // Life Sciences, Society and Policy. 2017. Vol. 13. Art. 5. DOI: 10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1.
8. Sharma, P. Bibliometric analysis of research in ethical concerns and dilemmas of digital mental health care in the last two decades / P. Sharma, R. Wagani, M.A. Varghese // Frontiers in Human Dynamics. 2025. Vol. 6. Art. 1502432. DOI: 10.3389/fhumd.2024.1
9. Szoszkiewicz, Ł. Mental privacy: navigating risks, rights and regulation / Ł. Szoszkiewicz, R. Yuste // EMBO Reports. 2025. Vol. 26. P. 3469–3473. DOI: 10.1038/s44319-025-00505-6.
10. Yuste, R. Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI / R. Yuste, S. Goering, B. Agüera y Arcas [et al.] // Nature. 2017. Vol. 551. P. 159–163. DOI: 10.1038/551159a.

Other articles