PRIVACY
If you share information with
me (Bless You) and the information deals with a branch of my 'family', please
understand that my intention is to fold that information into my own master
gedcom. Currently I post at
RootsWeb's WorldConnect. Doing so,
allows me a measure of control over how information is displayed on persons
calculated to be living. At this
time, I omit all notes and only display the birth year. I feel this is a reasonable compromise
between access to important genealogical information and the concerns of some
about privacy. However, when I
share portions of my data with others, I send the raw data. It's possible that information on living
persons that you send to me may end up displayed on the Web by someone else.
If
you send information on living people, I will assume that you have given the
issue of privacy some thought and concluded that nature of the information you
provide poses no significant risk of harm. If this is not the case, please tell me before
sending the information. Better
yet, edit the information before it is sent.
I intend no harm to anyone - and honestly do not believe that the information I post increases the risk of harm to others in any significant way. Information on persons (living or not) is not inherently evil. To use the analogy of a car; it is an essential tool when it gets us to work and brings far-flung families together, but it is a dangerous weapon in the hands of a drunk. Good and evil are not inherent properties of the car - good or evil exists in the use made of it. To ban the car for fear that it will be used in an 'evil' way, we must forfeit the 'good' it offers. There honest reasons for having information on living persons. In genealogy, the most obvious one is to allow others the chance of contacting them to share information on common lines.
Verbosity
is an Atrocity
An over-long (or overly superficial) monologue on the issue of Privacy.
Yes, I recognize that many people consider the issue of 'privacy' to be the most profound and fundamentally essential issue of the 'information age'. They may proudly proclaim themselves as members of an army engaged in a great and noble 'War'. Due to the incredible popularity of genealogy on the Web, genealogy sites are becoming 'battlefields' of the 'War'. Some (both soldiers and generals) are intelligent, articulate and offer compelling arguments in support of their cause - I, respectfully, disagree with many of their arguments. As I understand them, the arguments appear to fall into two categories; protection from financial harm and 'privacy for the sake of privacy'.
Protection from
financial harm
The most common argument is that people can, and will, do dastardly
things to you with only the most basic of information - your name, name(s) of
spouse(s), place of residence, birth date, parents names and names of children
- precisely the sort of thing that might be found at a genealogy site that does
not filter information on the living.
Certainly that's possible and there is at least one common (legendary)
example - the foolish practice of some banks and credit card companies of using
your mother's maiden name as a means of verifying that you are who you say you
are. The simple solution is not to
make such information 'forbidden ground', but for the banks and credit card
companies to use an alternate method of verifying callers (and for you to
insist on it). In truth, many
already do - not so much as part of a noble effort to protect you - but a pragmatic
effort to protect themselves - they, also, incur loss from fraud.
People hoping to do you financial harm need not come to an Internet genealogy site. Every time you pass your credit card to a store clerk, every time you use a cellular or cordless phone, every time you apply for credit, every time you walk among a crowd (with potential pick-pockets) - you place yourself at risk. To live anything resembling a 'normal' life, there can be no absolute protection. There are some common-sense things you can do to minimize the risk - like knowing when a credit card is missing and checking your statements, etc., etc.
In a far broader sense, there are far more effective, common, and 'legal' ways to profit (or it's opposite, avoid loss) from information about you - information both general and specific. Have you ever seen a marketing analysis? Your address places you in a category, sub-category, and sub-sub-category. This makes a profound difference on the advertisements you find in your mailbox, the availability and cost of insurance - the list is endless.
With today's most sophisticated equipment, and even given unfettered access, it would be impossible to determine the number of 'mailing lists' or 'customer lists' you appear on or to identify the range of specific and personal information contained there. You 'suffer' far more 'harm' in their use and misuse than from any outright fraud. While many find the practice distasteful, even shameful - few people are naive enough to believe that the 'marketing juggernaut' can be slowed. Let's move on - thinking about this for even a few minutes is very, very, spooky - to dwell on it could drive, otherwise sane, people into full blown, clinical, paranoia.
The non-commercial
collection and use of information?
Government (capital - G) simply cannot function without the collection
and analysis of information about people - in allocating resources and services
(and the funding for those services).
This is especially true of a representative democracy - in reapportioning
districts in state and federal legislatures. Is there a guarantee that the information will be used
fairly and appropriately? No, but
the alternative is the use of a crystal ball or a flip of the coin.
Privacy for it's own
sake
If this is a compelling concern, you'd best hope there are no High
School Yearbook pictures of you out there or that the cute pictures your
parents took when you were a naked toddler are all destroyed! More seriously, though - genealogy
itself offers strong evidence that substantial chunks of what many consider to
be 'private information' has seldom, if ever, been inaccessible. Consider that, with some effort,
genealogists are able to glean a remarkable breadth of specific and detailed
information about people and families who lived so long ago - before the
Internet, before computers, before marketing analysts, before Social Security,
before the census. Genealogists of
the future (or others with inquiring minds) will have a field day. If for some reason they think it's
useful, they will almost certainly have access to information about what cars
you drove, what magazines you read, what toothpaste you used - and if you're
unlucky enough, know how you chose to wet your cigar (sorry about that, Mr.
Clinton).
Like it or not, people leave traces - they always have. Increasingly, you cannot control the existence of personal information - but, as always, you have some measure of control about the nature of that information. Potential lenders will acquire credit information - it's your job to insure the information is accurate and positive. My hometown paper prints all arrests, traffic violations and overdue property taxes. I can do little or nothing to prevent this 'invasion of privacy' - I can only attempt to avoid negative attention through my action (or inaction).
I suggest that the only
place 'true privacy' reigns is in our unspoken hopes, fears and dreams
(assuming we don't talk in our sleep).
I suggest that any 'War for Privacy' has long since been lost - years,
decades, and eons ago.
The issue should not be the
existence of personal information, but how it is used.
I
welcome discussion on the issues, but be forewarned - angry tirades or
vindictives are not likely to sway me - while reason and logic in an atmosphere
of mutual respect, may.
And finally
I include living people in my genealogy for a reason - to connect with
them personally and offer them the opportunity to connect to our shared past
(and shared present). This wasn't
my intention at first - I started as most amateur genealogists by focusing on
my direct ancestors. But I
couldn't resist the temptation of adding descendants of these ancestors. Entirely by accident, I began running
into, and communicating with, living 'cousins'. I found them to be a very interesting lot - every bit as
interesting and diverse as my long dead ancestors. I've found them living in New York, Florida, Montana,
California, Canada, England, Australia and Bangkok Thailand - and found one
living a few blocks away!
As fascinating and rewarding as 'traditional' genealogy is, it can be more than a discovery of the past - but an exploration of the present. It need not be limited to a memorial catalogue of the dead but an album celebrating the living.
I
invite you to join me in the quest - or to begin a quest of your own.