I often
wonder when we are going to decide that an individuals’ right to privacy ends
when that person acts or aspires to act in a way that impacts the life and
welfare of others.
In Chicago,
the mayoral candidates are scrambling to outdo one another’s pledges to remove
cameras at intersections, apparently because most Chicago motorists believe
their privacy rights extend to being
allowed to run red lights, even if doing so is against the law and may kill
other people.
We are learning
that strict German privacy regulations probably prevented Lufthansa and its
subsidiary German Wings from acting as aggressively as they should have to
prevent a suicidal co-pilot from slaughtering a plane full of passengers.
Similarly,
we can’t know the names of the Secret Service agents involved in any of that
agency’s recent failures, whether any of the agents involved in those failures
have been or will be dismissed and details of the selection and training processes
that made it possible for deficient personalities to play important roles.
The privacy
fixation also impacts our lives in day- to- day ways that challenge common
sense and shape the social contract. Universities are not allowed to give me
the grades of those for whom I pay tuition, doctors won’t talk to me about my
wife’s health, banks won’t give me
credit card balances on cards issued to others on which I am joint guarantor.
While these irritants do not threaten the public welfare, the imposition of
legislated standards which supersede pre-existing presumptions of normality
erodes the social contract by implying
that privacy has a uniquely important value.
We will
never be able to identify those most likely to commit horrific acts until we
are prepared to acknowledge that an application to undertake public life
requires giving up personal privacy. A
person who wants to fly or drive a public conveyance, a person who wants a
license to practice medicine or dentistry, a person who wants to teach or care
for our children, a person who seeks the right to provide legal, brokerage or
accounting services, a person who seeks the right to carry a weapon in public
places – all these and others who influence the lives of others -- should be
prepared for complete disclosure. How
else can we judge the character and qualifications of those to whom we trust
our lives, our money and our reputations?
I’m tired of
it. Are you?
