Case Study: Invasion Of Privacy

As human beings and citizens of the world, everyone values their privacy. It is a right that is often looked over and taken for granted by most. Since the beginning of time, there have been concerns about individuals’ rights to privacy and their personal information remaining confidential. Our founding fathers had concerns about this which is why, “…this right has developed into

In this instance, Griffith would not be sheltered from retaliation under the traditional state and federal whistleblower laws. Federal laws generally protect those that disclose fraud against the government and state law NY Code 740 covers private sector and only when the complaint has been brought to the supervisor first. In the complaint against the State of New York et al the District Court ruled that Griffith’s first amendment rights and first amendment retaliation claims would not be summarily dismissed.

* Confidentiality – the steps that are taken when people’s information is not kept confidential and on a need to know basis

Based on this case, the nine Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosure exemptions indicate the information that government agencies can withhold. For instance, documents which are “records or information compiled for law enforcement purpose” (Ciment, 2015). Exemption (7)(A) provides for the withholding of a law enforcement record the disclosure of which would reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. Furthermore, the 2002 law establishing the Department of Homeland Security gave that department

The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 protects journalists from being required to turn over to law enforcement any work product and documentary materials, including sources before it is disseminated to the public. Journalists who most need the protection of

When the first 10 amendments of the constitution were written, one of the main concerns was government intrusion. In the 1800s, citizens were concern about the confidentiality of their correspondence. Likewise in 1890, the concern was photography and yellow journalism. With lack of privacy laws, citizens brought several cases to the U.S courts because they felt there were violations of privacy. As a consequent, several torts were written and recognize by most states. This torts included the intrusion upon seclusion, public disclosure of private facts, false light or publicity, and appropriation. Though, historical events have help to expand the definition of privacy, there has not been a critical event that forced America to have a comprehensive federal policy about protecting the right to privacy. Nevertheless, every time that there is a major concern that threatens the right to privacy, the government and the states have passed laws to eliminate those

Confidentiality means not sharing information about people without their knowledge and agreement, and ensuring that written and electronic information cannot be accessed or read by other people who have no reason to see it.

This paper is being submitted to Steven Mendoza, Ph.D., MSCP in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Law and Ethics, PSY627, on January 24, 2015.

Marcus Ashmore and Terrell Lee Green were maintenance workers for J.P. Thayer Co., Inc. under supervisor Gene Fye. After a particular incident of harassment on January 16, 2001, Plaintiffs reported Fye to Tricia Johnson, the Assistant Property Manager. At this time, Johnson did nothing about the complaint. The harassment continued, and on January 26, Plaintiffs complained to the Property Manager, Mary Frances de Rivera. In response, de Rivera verbally reprimanded Fye. This, however, did not stop Fye’s harassment. Instead of reporting the behavior to Defendant, Plaintiffs hired an attorney who wrote a letter to Defendant saying that Ashmore and Green were going to file charges of discrimination with the EEOC. On February 22, Fye was fired by Defendant. This came three days after getting the letter and about a month after the initial harassment complaints.

Confidentiality in the Healthcare arena can be simply defined as the moral and ethical duty of the Practitioner to keep all the patient’s bio-data under lock and key, and offer a disclosure of those facts that the patient is legally mandated to disclose or deems fit to enhance their positive health outcome. According to the Segen’s Medical Dictionary, “Confidentiality is the ethical principle that a physician may not reveal any information disclosed in the course of medical care, unless the patient who disclosed that information poses a threat to him, herself or others’’

Both parties consulted their attorneys whose guidance instructed them that they did not have to disclose the information. The motivating factor in both decisions was to protect the livelihood of their companies. The facts of the information that had been revealed to each company had not been proven.

In this paper, I will discuss the principles that permit disclosure of protected health information with or without the patient’s consent for each of the four categories, government agencies, legal agencies or representatives and research groups. I will also state whether I feel privacy safeguards are adequate to support those principles.

In the major decision construing and applying Exemption 7c, United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989), the Supreme Court noted the need, under the statute, to balance the interests of openness and accountability against the statutory recognition of individual privacy. The justices unanimously rejected claims of access to a suspect’s rap sheet, noting the vital distinction (in FOIA) between the statute’s “purpose to ensure that the Government’s activities be opened to the sharp eye of public scrutiny” and the contrasting claim that “information about private citizens that happens to be in the

"Privacy. There seems to be no legal issue today that cuts so wide a swath through conflicts confronting American society: from AIDS tests to wiretaps, polygraph test to computerized data bases, the common denominator has been whether the right to privacy outweighs other concerns of society…" This quote from Robert Ellis Smith explains, in one sentence, the absolute need to ensure privacy in the workplace. One of the most interesting, yet controversial, areas concerning public personnel is employee privacy. What limits are there to employers’ intrusions into, and control over, employees’ behaviors and personal properties?

Unfortunately, during most of this century many people equated whistleblowers with tattle tales. For instance, until the early 1980s, legal indices often listed the law of whistleblowing under the word "snitch" or "informant." During the Nixon era, much of that negative attitude changed. With the advent of Watergate, the public began to recognize the service whistleblowers were providing to taxpayers at great risk to themselves.