Privacy is one of the many indefinite terms one comes across. When thinking of how to define privacy, then we can think of a state wherein you are free from other's attention, something that can be solely viewed and accessed by you. The lines vaguely defined are furthermore blurred when this privacy is implied on individual daily relationships. Some of the kinds of relationships in which privacy comes to play are government-citizen, student- teacher, friend-friend and the parent-child relationship. All such relationships bring out moral complexities when it comes to figuring out the extent on which privacy applies between the two parties.
To structure the reasoning behind the complexity that comes along with privacy as an abstract term, we can view it from the perspective of the three dimensions of privacy. Roessler defines these dimensions which can be understood as 'possibilities for exercising control over "access" and which describe 'three ways of explaining the normativity of privacy'. The local dimension of privacy alludes to our command over access to physical spaces. This dimension can likewise remember control over access to our own physical body. The information dimension of privacy alludes to "power over what others think/know of a person". Lastly, the decisional dimension of privacy refers to one's "symbolic access" to one's decisional sphere. Access, along with privacy, can be considered as a flexible term. To understand privacy concerning access, we must define what privacy truly means in this context.
Privacy is essentially the condition in which others are deprived access of you. Access can be viewed as an opportunity to approach or consider something. According to this, privacy is a function of the extent to which people can access you either physically, or can access information about you. Based on this, it can be implied that in case people cannot access you in any way, you enjoy complete privacy. Most of the time, however, other people can either gain some access or have to go through some trouble to gain (some) access to you. Hence, it can loosely be concluded that people could never enjoy complete privacy.
To view this situation from a moral perspective, we must not focus on access per se, but rather the question of how access is gained, and to what one is gaining access. These questions can be supported by the fact that every time you walk in a public place, others have access to bits of information about you; they can see what you are wearing, where you are going, how tall you are and so on. This aspect is usually not considered problematic.
This complexity, problematic or not, points out that access definitions can lead to counterintuitive conclusions. It can be argued that "to refer[...] to the privacy of a lonely man on a desert island would be to engage in irony". The fact that a person stranded on an island alone can be said to be enjoying his privacy is absurd since enjoying privacy has a lot to do with the person being able to grant or deny access to others. This is why control should play a big part in how we define privacy. As a child, you do not have much agency over your privacy. A lot of that has to do with the fact that until you turn eighteen, and in some cases even after that, your actions are 'under the jurisdiction' of your parents. As the child becomes older, the need for privacy increases. This is because the child is still trying to build an identity and a personality for themselves. They are also gaining new physical and thinking skills and developing new social interests. A crucial aspect of growing up is to handle all these challenges independently and responsibly.
Parenting is more than teaching your child what is right and wrong and punishing them for their wrongdoings. A significant part of maintaining a good relationship between a parent and their child is having mutual respect for one another. This respect comes in many aspects of the relationship but especially so when it comes to respecting the other's privacy. Establishing boundaries is one of the most significant steps to ensure that there is no intrusion in your definition of privacy.
The reason why there is ever a conflict and complexity when it comes to privacy in such an intimate relationship is that everyone's perspective and definition of privacy and everything it entails is entirely different. One might believe that parents routinely checking their child's phone for unacceptable activity is an acceptable thing to do while someone else can consider it as an invasion of privacy.
Some parents believe that reading their child's diary or going through their phone will help them monitor their child's activity. The parents usually reach this stage when their child becomes withdrawn from them and subsequently does things more independently. This is very common among teenagers since they are going through puberty and particular changes wherein they repel from any person who holds an authoritative power over them, this includes their parents who have the most jurisdiction over them. This is where the entire conflict begins, with secrecy.
Parents relate their child wanting more privacy and time alone to them hiding things from them. Since this is the time when the child is viable to be exposed to many things that warrant the parent's worry, they have an urge to invade their child's privacy to ensure that they are following the 'correct path' that the parents and society itself has imposed on them.
However, it should be established that no matter how pure the motives are, it will inevitably cause a rift between the parent and the child if there is an invasion of what the child considers as their private space. The reason children believe their diary and their phone are "personal spaces" which are not be subjected to an invasion of privacy is that they think that no one is looking. Something they would prefer having only in their mind and not written down so that there isn't any substantial evidence of their thoughts implies that it's as private as the thoughts in their brain. An intrusion into these belongings of the child is essentially an intrusion of their mind and their opinions.
If reading into and picking apart the context of these thoughts are considered acceptable by the parents, then this mindset is more problematic than anything. Pragmatically, it can be said that children grow up to become exceptional adults without their parents reading their diaries. So it can be noted that not only is the invasion unwarranted but it is also unnecessary.
I believe that there are a few fundamental reasons why very specific and stable, and sometimes even rigid boundaries should be established when it comes to privacy. It violates privacy, it violates the integrity of the child's self, and it undermines the trust that is the basis of a parent-child relationship.
We are starting with the aspect of the violation of privacy. There is a difficulty when establishing when there is a need to the set boundaries for the well-being of your child itself. This occurs when there is an understanding that limits are set and then respected to ensure a stable and mutual agreement and harmony between the parent and child. It is also when there is an understanding that the idea of violating an established boundary and then intruding the child's privacy is brought about to monitor and ensure the well-being of the child.
When people violate privacy, however, it is natural that the other person expresses anger. It is more prone to happen in the parent-child relationship since the child is less likely to understand or even try to understand the parent's reasoning behind the violation. There is a reason this is called a 'violation' of privacy: another is intruding into an area that the holder has explicitly or implicitly excluded them from. Although it is easy to understand the reasoning from the parent's perspective, it is also crucial to view the child's perspective. The child sees it as their parents not respecting their views and boundaries and them trying to establish their authority over them just because they believe they have some jurisdiction over their child. This consequently makes the child deem their parent as untrustworthy, which shakes the entire base of a stable and healthy parent-child relationship.
We are moving on to the violation of the child's self. Parental control, combined with unconditional warmth, is a crucial feature of a healthy parent-child relationships. However, the type of control is critical. Setting rules and high behavioural standards are what good parents do. However, what they cannot and must not do is exercise psychological control. This is when they intrude on the child's sense of self by expecting them to want what the parent wants, feel what the parent feels and believe what the parent believes. In this sense, they try to regulate the behaviour of the child, which is not the way of proper parenting but rather is intrusive parenting. It is associated with several adverse outcomes, including depression, anxiety and poor parent-child relationships. Invading the child's privacy denies the child a sense of integral self. It erases the boundary between parent and child and takes their right to control it away.
"Snooping" of parents can, in most cases, backfire. Kid's natural response to intrusive parenting is to hide information or lie. This is counterproductive as well. The more parents think kids are lying, the more kids lie. Parents are not particularly good at knowing when their children are lying. So a lot of it comes down to personality: some parents are suspicious, and some kids tend to hide things. But the negative cycle of lying and privacy invasion usually ends in one place: distrust.
In conclusion, I believe that most matters, especially concerning relationships, consist of blurry lines and no definitive terms. Even so, I think the key to establishing a way of not violating one's privacy in a way that will result in conflict is distinction. According to studies, it has been found that when parents monitor good kids intrusively, it does more harm than good. But when the child has already been getting in trouble, it can be protective. This is because there's a trade-off between protecting a child who needs it and intruding on one who doesn't. This kind of distinction helps form a mindset among the parents to help handle issues of invasion of privacy in a more systematic and empathetic manner with little no conflict. Invasion of privacy, because of its many connotations and possible retaliations, should be handled with utmost sensitivity and mutual respect.
Sources:
The Handbook of Privacy Studies: An Interdisciplinary Introduction
raisingchildren.net.au/pre-teens/communicating-relationships/family-relationships/privacy-trust-teen-years
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/thinking-about-kids/201702/no-mom-you-cant- read-your-daughters-diary-or-texts
コメント