Yours, Mine, Ours

After reading Byrne’s article, “Access to Online Local Government Public Records,”  I had only one major thought running through my mind… why are these public records online in the first place?  If there is this concern about the information, then why is it made public in the first place?  Yes, the public records need to be stored, and it makes sense to store them electronically- but why do they have to make their way to the internet?  Who makes these decisions?   It seems apparent from the article that different states have different ways of publishing the public records, but why are these methods not standardized amongst the country?  And another thought… how are public records deleted?  If I am living in Wisconsin, and my public record shows my address and phone number, what would happen if I would move to California?  Who is overseeing the public records to know that my Wisconsin public record who need to be deleted and a new California public record created?  Is there a chance that the public records could be wrong?  Lots of questions I know, but something about the “public record paradox” just doesn’t add up for me.  Is there any beneficial reason for making these public records public via the Internet?

In comparing Byrne’s article with Charo’s “Body of Research- Ownership and Use of Human Tissue,”  I realized that it seems that “property”, whether it be information, tissues, cells, bodies… does not necessarily belong to us as people.  It seems like a simple concept: my phone number is my phone number.  I can give it to whomever I want… but then others can get it if they really want it to.  My bodily tissue is my bodily tissue.  I can give it to whomever I want… but then others can get it if they really want it.  I found it interesting in the article that it stated that there did not need to be consent for research that would pose minimal risks to subjects.  Who gets to decide what “minimal risk to subjects” is?  Again, this just seems a little fishy- and it shouldn’t!  We are talking about our own bodies here!  Apparently “property,” even if we own it- is not entirely ours.

I will admit that I am not up to date on issues of Stem Cell Research.  I know the basis, and that it can be a widely debated hot topic.  Streiffer’s article, “Informed Consent and Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research” made me slightly concerned.  Why are these consent forms so sneaky and cryptic?  Maybe I am wrong, but I feel as though researchers would still be able to get the cells they need if they offered a price for them.  People will do some pretty outrageous things for money… think about the amount of people that cell blood, plasma, or sperm!  Is the reason that researchers want to “trick” people so they will have a diverse cross section of cells to work with?  Again, I just don’t see the benefit of taking cells in this fashion.  These consent forms remind me of the agreements you agree to when you are uploading photos to photo services, or when you buy music online.  The agreements are very long and rarely do I read them all the way through and through.  But, I guess that is what the consent forms are playing on.  I would be interested to see if the donation of cells was clearly stated on the consent form- would people allow their cells to be used?  My guess would be yes.