Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Less Privacy is Good for Us(and You). Question 2
Amitai Etzioni's article, "Less Privacy is Good for Us (and You), depicts a very interesting discussion for and against privacy and its issues. Privacy is very important. Never-the-less, is privacy something so important as to where a person is harming others by covering up something of their own? What do I think? No. Although privacy protects and is typically a good thing for many people, it also has its downfalls. An example from Etzioni's article is the HIV testing of infants. Privacy laws may prevent mothers from having their child tested for HIV because it violates the privacy of the mother who passed the disease onto her child. Etzioni wrote, "To save the lives of their children, they must be tested at delivery and treated even if this entails a violation of mothers' privacy". If the disease is known in advance the mother can help ward of the HIV disease from passing onto her child. Other examples in this article talk about the ups and downs of biometrics, background checks for jobs, and search warrants. These topics are made to help protect the privacy of the individual, yet also protect the affected population. Privacy is a very touchy topic. We may never all agree on what is too far, however, I believe we all agree that privacy may be infringed upon under reasonable situations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You couldn't have said it any better in your last sentence that we all may never agree because people have very different feelings on this topic, I completely agree that there are certain times when someones privacy can be violated and that privacy is very important for someone to have, but only to a certain extent. For example:an employer should know someones background who is applying for a job, because you never know what someone could have done.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you and Natasha. Everyone has their own views on whether privacy should or should not be violated. I agree with your statement on how when it comes to the health of someone, such as preventing a child from getting HIV from their mother, privacy being "invaded" is reasonable. Some mothers may feel that once they are tested their privacy has been invaded, as you pointed out, but doctors do have the right to know if someone has a disease. The doctors are not going to broadcast who has HIV, they are there to help because that is their job. I also agree with Natasha on how background checks are important because no company would want to hire someone they feel would put their employees in harm.
ReplyDelete