The objective of ensuring efficacy in the delivery of healthcare has always been a legitimate aim for regulators and technologists alike. It has long been thought that information health technology could aid in great cost savings and also, in the optimal addressing of the needs of patients. Electronic health records, clinical decision support and computerized physician order entry are among the information health technology applications that have been part of current information health technology in hospitals for quite some time.Technology, of course, is not a purpose in itself. It supposedly aims at serving people's existing and proven needs, in a way that while using technology (and paying its costs), we can justify the decision of creation and use of this technology not only because as humans we love to create and innovate, and as technologists we enthuse over new "gadgets", or even to make money in inventing new markets for our own pure financial gain, but because we address people's real needs and enhance their quality of life. Our research, then, should be worth both time and money, as otherwise it would not justify itself and time and money should be devoted to other endeavors.In the context of healthcare, people become more vulnerable than in any other context and their paramount needs, interests and rights dictate that we be even more careful in our technological inventions. Patients must be treated in the most careful way possible. Human rights are implicated in healthcare delivery in an acute manner and this is the reason why healthcare/medical ethics were amongst the first fields of ethics developed early in the 19th century. The distinct power play with the figure of the potent physician on one hand and the feeble childlike patient on the other must now be completed with a healthcare technologist somewhere in the background, who in effect alters the picture often in very important ways. So, electronic health care information systems both offer new opportunities for monitoring access to health and impose additional challenges for protecting human rights. The delivery of medicine is more and more dependent on technology, starting with the results of an endless series of medical diagnostic and other tests etc. We have also seen a gradual but steady distancing of a patient from her physician; the relationship often is not even a relationship at all, but an instant occurrence once in time.RFID technology, that is radio frequency identification, is a rather new technology which was not initially relevant to health care. RFID uses radio waves in order to permit the instant identification of items, so data is possible to be processed over short distances. RFID systems can identify objects which bear a RFID tag without line-of-sight contact and permit the wireless transmission of data and connection to databases and various applications. The identification of objects with certainty and at real time of course has been and is something we want to pursue in many domains. When we do our inventory, we know in an instant what items we have in stock.In healthcare delivery services, we also have many objects to tag, and therefore secure their immediate and safe identification. This ranges from medical sponges and scalpels and other surgical instruments. One of the common lawsuits in medical negligence has been a surgical instrument negligently left in the body of a patient. This is not the same, of course with the operation on the wrong person-the solution "tag a patient" as you "tag" a sponge appears immediately problematic. Patients with dementia or Alzheimer's disease could seem suitable for the use of a 'portable' identification system, especially in the case where a patient wanders around and caregivers may not easily find where she is. But as evident in the literature, the questions of using RFID technology on people, patients or healthcare personnel pose significant ethical questions, especially on privacy/data protection, justice/equity and more importantly, on the commodification of human beings (hence, dignity).