The example provided illustrates the difficulties in the educational sphere.
Consider an imaginary scenario involving a child acknowledged as very mature
for their age (13yrs) whose religious base is one containing a refusal to
allow blood transfusions.
The child is in need of urgent medical care which is only treatable by blood
transfusion, without which they will die. The situation is explained to the
child who details the religious beliefs of their community but requests that
blood be given to allow them to live on the condition that no mention of
this is made to anybody.
Ignoring the moral perspectives and potential difficulties emanating from
both of the described situations the importance of the childs ability to
access their own information, but deny that access to others becomes
paramount. In both situations the nature of privacy and its protection
becomes a very important issue to the individuals concerned and highlights
the need for considerable care to be taken by DPO's when determining what
appropriate response to make when dealing with a SAR involving a child.
(i.e. (a) die or be alienated from your community. (b) Never confide in a
teacher/trust a school or have sufficient trust to ask for advice/confide).
Both of the described situations appear to rely upon the data subjects
wishes taking precedence over all others.
Ian W
N.B. Have just read Donalds contribution. Food for thought in the blood
transfusion scenario.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection
> issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Trent
> Sent: 31 March 2006 15:59
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Phot Image consent
>
>
> Digressing from the topic of photos a little, the concept of
> being sufficiently competent to decide what happens about
> data concerning a child flows both ways.
>
> Consider a mature young teenager in the awkward period
> between 13 and 16, where they are increasingly intellectually
> mature, and yet considered for many things to be a child.
> That teenager confides in a teacher a matter that is lawful,
> of great personal importance to them and that they wish
> always to be kept secret from parent, carer, guardian etc.
> It is a matter of sufficient important for the teacher to
> note carefully and formally in the child's record, is
> sensitive data and is correctly safeguarded. The Durant
> precedent is not relevant because of the manner in which the
> data is held, and a SAR from the child would be expected to
> reveal this information to the child.
>
> The parent, suspecting something of this, issues a SAR
> against the school requiring disclosure of all data held on
> the child. The parents motives are irrelevant. They may be
> wholesome and protective of their child, they may be abusive,
> but that is not relevant.
>
> I can see a large argument ensuing whatever the school does:
>
> A) Fulfils the SAR without reference to the child: Against
> child's express wishes
> B) Consults child about SAR: Child has blazing row with
> parents because child feels spied upon
> C) Partially fulfils SAR omitting reference to the
> confidential item: Suspicious parent raises hell
> D) Refuses to fulfil the SAR because the parent is not
> entitled to any information of this class about the child:
> Parent raises hell
>
> etc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection
> issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Welton
> Sent: 31 March 2006 15:45
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [data-protection] Phot Image consent
>
> As you say given the various activities children may be
> involved with at school the difficulties are numerous.
>
> The point you make though seems to me to present the main
> subject at issue from a slightly different perspective. i.e.
> At what point and in what way does a child become
> sufficiently mature to deal with all the information
> necessary to properly inform them in any particular decision
> they may make about their own privacy.
>
> Acknowledging that decisions on disclosure to a child would
> be dependent upon the issues in question as well as perhaps
> more influentially how others who hold relevant information
> are able cope with or explain it a further matter of who
> should make disclosure decisions when a child has reached the
> necessary level of maturity arises, and how should those
> people be kept informed of opinions about levels of maturity.
>
> Given that education systems themselves are ostensibly
> designed to inform children at appropriate levels of maturity
> about information which is thought pertinent to them the
> issue could perhaps be viewed from some perspectives and in
> some circumstances as less than clear but it is one which the
> DPA requires to be taken when dealing with a childs data
>
> Ian W
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Tim Trent
> > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 1:14 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Phot Image consent
> >
> >
> > There is one extra and important element here. That of abusive ex
> > carers who may be restrained from contact with a child.
> >
> > I can cite an example where my wife teaches of a child
> whose pictures
> > may not ever appear in any form in a way to make the child
> traceable
> > by her absent abusive ex carer. The child's school surname is
> > unrelated to the "real" surname. The child may not even be
> aware of
> > this, but the parent has given a blanket refusal, supported
> by court
> > papers, to seek to ensure that the child's picture never
> appears, for
> > the child is in real danger.
> >
> > If that child overrode the parental prohibition because he
> or she was
> > unaware of the possible consequences, and the school were
> not properly
> > aware of the issues (which happens because staff change and
> things do
> > get misplaced, or buried in files beneath a welter of papers) then
> > major problems would arise.
> >
> > Those whose role involves the safekeeping of children have a very
> > challenging tightrope to walk ensuring that the child's
> rights and the
> > child's safety are correctly balanced with the child's need to know
> > about potential danger.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lee Gardiner
> > Sent: 31 March 2006 11:38
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [data-protection] Phot Image consent
> >
> > I certainly don't see a major conflict in the two pieces of advice.
> > The Teachernet advice only says that 12 year olds are
> presumed to be
> > able to exercise their own rights but it doesn't say that parents
> > can't be consulted or that consent can't be obtained from them. In
> > fact the Teachernet advice encourages schools to include parents in
> > the process if children are over twelve.
> >
> > Just because a child is 12 years old doesn't mean they have
> sufficient
> > maturity, its only a presumption and isn't a hard and fast rule.
> > The fact is
> > some 12 year olds are more than mature enough to make an informed
> > decision while other older children quite clearly aren't so the
> > school/LEA must make a judgement based on the individual cases or,
> > more reasonably given the numbers of children starting at
> new schools
> > every year, have a policy to notify the parents and obtain their
> > consent for processing. There is nothing to stop the school
> involving
> > the children in this process.
> >
> > Regardless of this I hardly think the ICO is going to have major
> > issues with a school which errs on the side of caution and
> follows the
> > 'actnow' advice and obtains consent from the parents of a
> 12 year old
> > rather than the child themselves.
> >
> > A general rule of thumb test I employed at the ICO and that was said
> > to data controllers asking for any advice was 'what would
> you expect
> > to be done if it was your data being processed?' or in this
> case if it
> > was 'your son/daughter's data being processed?' I think in the vast
> > majority of cases people, as parents, would expect to be
> consulted and
> > if in doubt for schools/LEAs to err on the side of caution.
> Better to
> > get it 'wrong' by being too rigid than get it wrong by
> being too lax.
> >
> > As Tim has just said though consent lasting for 5 years is probably
> > pushing it but as to whether it should be obtained annually
> or maybe
> > bi-annually is a different matter My view is annual but obviously
> > others may disagree.
> >
> > The only remaining consideration is of course once a child reaches
> > their mid-teens they may be inclined to withdraw their consent for
> > certain non-essential processing (photographs etc) and schools/LEAs
> > should have mechanisms in place to allow for that.
> >
> > Lee Gardiner
> > Records Manager
> > x4140 or 01942 404140
> > [log in to unmask]
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.3/296 - Release Date: 3/29/06
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|