Essay, Pages 4 (994 words)
In today’s society, technology continues to find new ways to protect our children and families. Several devises have already been developed to track children when they are away from home. These devises work by GPS signal to track the movement of the child and are worn externally or are imbedded in an item of clothing. There are also GPS devices already approved for implantation in humans. VeriChip was the only Food and Drug Administration-approved human-implantable microchip for use in medical purposes (DHHS pg.
71702-71704). These developments have sparked a debate over whether we should consider implanting microchips in humans for tracking and safety reasons and not just medical purposes. Today there are microchips implanted into pets for tracking purposes yet they do not have a GPS signal and only work once the animal is found and not to track their location. These same kinds of devises may be offered in the future for humans. Our government should never allow microchips to be implanted in humans for any purposes much less mandate their use.
External tracking devices currently available have the capability to track children for safety without the need for implanting a microchip in the body. This kind of tracking device would serve no purpose in tracking the child’s location. As stated in this article: Chip implants would be of little use in tracking a missing child as readers only have a limited range (Lane par 14). The FDA believes that a person’s overall health may be affected by tissue reaction, movement of implanted chip, failure of transponder, among many other complications.
In addition, it is clear that there are many risks involving implantation of these devise (DHHS pg. 71702-71704). The FDA also has a waiver to be signed that releases them from any liability in regards to these devises, not to mention they are also currently conducting research to see if these devices can cause cancer in the patient implanted with these microchips. Today there are microchips ready for implantation into humans but at what cost to our health? We already know that these devises pose several health risks and are a direct violation to human rights.
However, what we do not know about the effects of these devises may be far more dangerous than anticipated. Imposing a law to mandate these devices in the future could be far more costly to society then we will ever know. Some say these devises will be good for medical patients however; there are many other ways to track ones medical history without implanting a foreign object into the body. There are too many side effects associated with this devise, which frankly is unnecessary and not needed for any real purpose, other than for tracking of an individual every move at any given time. Personally, I do not want that kind of power given to anyone. The opposition on the other hand believes that these devises will be good for medical patients. However; there are many other ways to track ones medical history without implanting a foreign object into the body. Currently there are medical I.D. bracelets to alert health care providers to any emergencies without the need for implanting microchips. Implanting microchips in humans also raises the question to the right of privacy as well as health concerns related to implantation.
Our right to privacy is defined as the right to one’s freedom of intrusion. If all humans were implanted with microchips, there would be no such thing as privacy as we now know it, not to mention the invasiveness of the surgery for implantation. The continuing presence of the microchip within the individual must also be taken into account when considering our human rights. In combination with the surgery, the implant represents a permanent intrusion of our privacy. With an implanted microchip, your brain is hotwired into a computer that has a GPS tracking systems to monitor your movements, every minute of every day, for the rest of your life. Just imagine how creepy that really sounds. The concept of privacy for anyone implanted would never exist again. To protect our privacy, we need to better understand its value and the purpose it serves. Privacy is understood as an important barrier that gives us space to develop an identity that is separate from the supervision, assessments, and values of our society.
Privacy is crucial for helping us manage all of the pressures that shape the type of person we are in society. Privacy is also used as the groundwork to protect our other fundamental rights. If our right to privacy were compromised then our other rights would soon faultier as well. To implant microchips into human being seems to be a clear case of intrusion of our bodies and our lives. Another reason our government should not allow microchips implanted in humans is that it would serve no real purpose except to track our movements and why should anyone have that much power over any individual. We need to consider the bigger picture as stated in this article: Imagine what the government could do with this kind of technology.
If it wanted to, it could use this technology to track literally every movement and behavior of everyone at any given time (Slavo par 15). Personally, this technology even being considered in our society should be a crime. The government should not allow or mandate implantation of microchips in humans for any reason. There are many reasons why these devises should not be implanted but instead should be outlawed. These devices not only pose a health risk to patients but also violate our rights to privacy. I have stated many reasons why the government should not allow microchips to be implanted in humans, not only is it morally, ethically and logically wrong but it would also serve no real purpose other than tracking our movements which should never be allowed. Personally, I do not want anyone to have that much power over me and neither should you.