Skip to main content
Log in

Technology, Families, and Privacy: Can We Know Too Much About Our Loved Ones?

  • Published:
Journal of Consumer Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Both an array of privacy advocates and a body of privacy policies have emerged to reduce threats to personal privacy posed by Big Government and Big Business. Technologies that threaten personal privacy when employed by large institutions are increasingly being used by family members to track one another, but without a comparable level of societal scrutiny and control. This paper examines four such technologies – internet tracking software, global positioning systems, miniature cameras, and genetic tests – to gauge their level of use and public acceptance and then to consider their impact on family relations, especially those between parent and child and between spouses. While these technologies are intended to promote the safety of family members, by disrupting personal privacy, they may also provoke a number of counterproductive responses that reduce safety. Moreover, the deployment of these technologies may inhibit the development of trust and trustworthiness within the family. Partly owing to a lack of understanding of how new technologies affect family relations, both formal and informal efforts to control these technologies have been slow to develop.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, L. (1997). Body science. American Bar Association Journal, 83 (April), 44-49.

  • Berlins, M. (2002). Where is the benefit in punishing parents of delinquent children with financial sanctions? The Guardian, April 30, p. 15.

  • Cole, J. I. (2001). Surveying the digital future-Year Two: The UCLA Internet Report 2001. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Communication Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. I. (2000). Surveying the digital future: The UCLA Internet Report 2001. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Communication Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, J. (2000). The “G” in GIS-What are the ethical limits of GIS? geoplace.com, May (http://www.geoplace.com/gw/2000/0500/0500g.asp).

  • Doland, A. (2002). New cell phones find locations, diversions. Chicago Tribune, March 4, p. 7.

  • Douglass, E. (2001). Cell phones set to track call locales. Los Angeles Times, October 18, p. T1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eng, P. (2002). I, Chip? Technology to meld chips into humans draws closer. abcnews.com, February 25 (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/chipimplant020225.html).

  • Geller, G., Doksum, T., Berhardt, B. A., & Metz, S. A. (1999). Participation in breast cancer susceptibility testing protocols: Influence of recruitment source, altruism, and family involvement on women's decisions. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 8, 377-383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gellman, R. (2002). Privacy, consumers, and costs: How the lack of privacy costs consumers and why business studies of privacy costs are biased and incomplete. Washington, DC: The Electronic Privacy Information Center, March (http://www.epic.org/reports/dmfprivacy.html).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, J. (2002). Future family? Florida family wants controversial ID chip implants. abcnews.com, February 9 (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/TechTV/techtv_verichipfamily020219.html).

  • Haney, C. (2000). Quotes of the year-Who said what in IT. infoworld.com, December 13 (http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/00/12/13/001213hnquotes.xml?p=br&s=1).

  • Hawkins, D. (2000). Cheap video cameras are monitoring our every move. U.S. News and World Report, January 17, pp. 52-53.

  • McDonough, B. (2001). Privacy is dead-See for yourself. wirelessnewsfactor.com, October 31 (http://www.wirelessnewsfactor.com/perl/story/14488.html).

  • McNeeley, T. (2000). Are you really willing to electronically spy on your kids? technocopia.com, November 18 (http://www.technocopia.com/parent-tech-gadgetseditorial-child-tracking-011.html).

  • Middleton, J. (2001). Sunday Times takes flak for kids net study. vnunet.com, October 22 (http://www.vnunet.com/News/1126328).

  • Nanny cams, baby monitors to make your baby and property safe and secure at the best prices, guaranteed! (2002). babysnanny.com (http://www.babysnanny.com/).

  • Nanny surveillance: The legal and ethical concerns of spying on your nanny (1996). Family Fun, June (family.go.com/raisingkids/child/skills/feature/balt199606_balt66nannyspy/balt199606_balt66nannyspy.html).

  • Police: GPS device used to stalk woman (2002). CNN.com./Technology, December 31 (http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/ptech/12/31/gps.stalk.ap/).

  • Rideout, V., Richardson, C., & Resnick, P. (2002). See no evil: How Internet filters affect the search for online health information. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J. (2002). Nanny-cam may leave a home exposed. New York Times, April 14, p. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siceloff, J. (1999). The hidden camera debate. abcnews.com, July 7 (http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_990707_nanny_feature.html).

  • Smith, K. R., Zick, C. D., Mayer, R. N., & Botkin, J. R. (2002). Voluntary disclosure of BRCA1 mutation test results. Genetic Testing, 6, 89-93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. R., West, J. A., Croyle, R. T., & Botkin, J. R. (1999). Familial context of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: Moderating effect of siblings' test results on psychological distress one to two weeks after BRCA1 mutation testing. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 8, 385-392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. E. (2000). Ben Franklin's web site: Privacy and curiosity from Plymouth Rock to the Internet. Providence, RI: Sheridan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenger, R. (1999). Tiny human-borne monitoring device sparks privacy fears. cnn.com, December 20 (http://www.cnn.com/1999/TECH/ptech/12/20/implant.device/).

  • The Aware Home (2002). Research Initiative of the Georgia Institute of Technology (http://www.awarehome.gatech.edu/).

  • TravelEyes2 is for your family (2002). thatstheticket.safeshopper.com (http://thatstheticket.safeshopper.com/11/cat11.htm?494).

  • Wade, W. (2003). Keeping tabs: A two-way street. New York Times, January 16, pp. C1-C2.

  • Weber, L. R., & Carter, A. I. (2003). The social construction of trust. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertz, D. C. (1997). Should geneticists cooperate with premarital testing before arranged marriages? The case of Dor Yeshorim. Gene Letter, August 1 (http://www.geneletter.org/archives/doryeshorim.html).

  • Wroe, M. (2001). The strange in your child's life. Sunday Times, December 2, p. 49.

  • Wroe, M. (2002). Are parents right to spy? Sunday Times, February 3, p. 49.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mayer, R.N. Technology, Families, and Privacy: Can We Know Too Much About Our Loved Ones?. Journal of Consumer Policy 26, 419–439 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026387109484

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026387109484

Keywords

Navigation