Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [EK Sooth Guild] Privacy

Expand Messages
  • tchipakkan
    On Friday, April 30, 2004, at 06:43 AM, Sam Wise wrote: ... This is a good analogy, I think. While I was growing, I was taught that if one leaves a letter, or
    Message 1 of 3 , May 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      On Friday, April 30, 2004, at 06:43 AM, Sam Wise wrote:
      In Devil's advocate mode:
      > Would you open {a medical records} folder
      This is a good analogy, I think. While I was growing, I was taught that
      if one leaves a letter, or journal on the kitchen table, it's an
      invitation for others to read it, but if it's in your room, it's
      private. Because of the ambiguity of whether things can be out of place
      accidentally (and ducking the whole Freudian slip question) I prefer
      people to actually say or clearly mark something intended for sharing.
      If you are sure that something was dropped accidentally, I think it's
      still in the "private" category. In this case, I'd probably ask them if
      I could look at it before I returned it, although I don't think it's a
      good question. [Doctors tend to consider medical files THEIR private
      information, not the patients, and it's damned difficult for patients
      to get hold of their own medical information, whether they want to
      share it or not.] But I do think that the decision of what you consider
      private and what you consider public is personal and widely varied.
      There's an incredible range of what information is considered personal
      from culture to culture, as well as from person to person, and much
      conflict can arise from when different definitions of privacy clash.
      If a client asked me to help them find out what I considered private
      information about a friend of theirs, I could say "I'm sorry, I don't
      do that." If they were open to it, I might explain why I thought
      looking into private information might be detrimental to their
      relationship- but they probably wouldn't be open to that. Another thing
      I come in contact with a lot is the example of whether it is acceptable
      to send healing energy for someone who hasn't directly asked you to do
      so. Do people have a right to refuse help when someone wants to give it
      to them? Do people have a right to decide how they are going to run
      their life? My father always said that "Your right to swing your fist
      ends an inch away from my nose."
      Is it right or wrong for a parent to search his or her child's room for
      drugs? Is it right or wrong for a school or police to search student's
      lockers? Randomly or with cause? These issues are complex.
      However, I think that the readings themselves do provide a built-in
      filter which provides an ethical safety margin. In my experience (and
      I'm willing to assume that this is not so for all readers) you only get
      what information you can use.
      Another option in a situation like this is to explain to the client
      that "you can't save anyone else." At what point does one person have a
      right to interfere with another? "Am I my brother's keeper?" is a
      frequently used way of examining this problem. I'm not sure we are
      going to solve it here- but discussing it certainly will prod each of
      us to consider it carefully- which I think the idea warrants.

      on your other example:
      > A computer hacker is hired to go into a company's computer to find
      > evidence that it is intentionally defrauding the customers.
      This example is a little odd- the hacker is hired by whom? The company?
      Is the company checking up on the computer to defend it's customers?
      That looks either like the company making sure that there isn't a
      hidden program that's making them do something they don't want to do to
      their customers, or maybe someone else is checking to see if the
      company is defrauding them. The company has a right to make sure it's
      equipment isn't malfunctioning, and a clear responsibility to protect
      it's customers. I'm guessing you are inferring that information
      unnecessary to that would be collected on the way- or that simple the
      accumulation of that information would be an unacceptable security risk
      (as with the question of a national personal database). You probably
      have an example in mind that would make it clear, but I don't see it.
      But I do think that ethics should be applied in a situation analyzing
      risk/benefits. Is the risk of collected information being mis-used
      greater than the benefit of the intended use for that collected
      information?
      This goes right back to the core of the doing a reading or "etheric
      information gathering" question. I still think that gathering
      information is not intrinsically wrong- only the use (although I'll
      acknowledge the risk for potential abuse) is the ethical question.
      Tchipakkan
      "When I get some money, I buy books. If any is left over, I buy food
      and clothing." ~Erasmus
    • Catherine Kane
      In re is it ethically ok to do healing on those who haven t asked for it 1)I feel its ethical to pray for the health + healing of others because prayer will
      Message 2 of 3 , May 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        In re is it ethically ok to do healing on those who haven't asked for it

        1)I feel its ethical to pray for the health + healing of others because prayer will not impose healing on folks who don't want it/aren't ready for it/have a good reason why they need to stay in a place of illness at this time.It only sets an atmosphere condusive to health if that is where that person needs to go
        2)As a Reiki master,I find its not ok to send Reiki directly on someone who hasn't asked for it(there's a Higher self method in my tradition for folks who are unconscious or otherwise unable to ask directly).I have found it ethical ,in certain cases where the persons world view might make them unable to ask or where other situations interfere (there are certain situations where its presumptious + intimidatiing to mention out of the blue"by the by I'm also an energy healer,now do you want fries w/ that?")to send Reiki to surround the situation that the person in question will be able to access + utilise if they are ready for healing.Kinda like setting up a bank account they can draw upon at will
        Catherine du Fay
        tchipakkan <tchipakkan@...> wrote:

        On Friday, April 30, 2004, at 06:43 AM, Sam Wise wrote:
        In Devil's advocate mode:
        > Would you open {a medical records} folder
        This is a good analogy, I think. While I was growing, I was taught that
        if one leaves a letter, or journal on the kitchen table, it's an
        invitation for others to read it, but if it's in your room, it's
        private. Because of the ambiguity of whether things can be out of place
        accidentally (and ducking the whole Freudian slip question) I prefer
        people to actually say or clearly mark something intended for sharing.
        If you are sure that something was dropped accidentally, I think it's
        still in the "private" category. In this case, I'd probably ask them if
        I could look at it before I returned it, although I don't think it's a
        good question. [Doctors tend to consider medical files THEIR private
        information, not the patients, and it's damned difficult for patients
        to get hold of their own medical information, whether they want to
        share it or not.] But I do think that the decision of what you consider
        private and what you consider public is personal and widely varied.
        There's an incredible range of what information is considered personal
        from culture to culture, as well as from person to person, and much
        conflict can arise from when different definitions of privacy clash.
        If a client asked me to help them find out what I considered private
        information about a friend of theirs, I could say "I'm sorry, I don't
        do that." If they were open to it, I might explain why I thought
        looking into private information might be detrimental to their
        relationship- but they probably wouldn't be open to that. Another thing
        I come in contact with a lot is the example of whether it is acceptable
        to send healing energy for someone who hasn't directly asked you to do
        so. Do people have a right to refuse help when someone wants to give it
        to them? Do people have a right to decide how they are going to run
        their life? My father always said that "Your right to swing your fist
        ends an inch away from my nose."
        Is it right or wrong for a parent to search his or her child's room for
        drugs? Is it right or wrong for a school or police to search student's
        lockers? Randomly or with cause? These issues are complex.
        However, I think that the readings themselves do provide a built-in
        filter which provides an ethical safety margin. In my experience (and
        I'm willing to assume that this is not so for all readers) you only get
        what information you can use.
        Another option in a situation like this is to explain to the client
        that "you can't save anyone else." At what point does one person have a
        right to interfere with another? "Am I my brother's keeper?" is a
        frequently used way of examining this problem. I'm not sure we are
        going to solve it here- but discussing it certainly will prod each of
        us to consider it carefully- which I think the idea warrants.

        on your other example:
        > A computer hacker is hired to go into a company's computer to find
        > evidence that it is intentionally defrauding the customers.
        This example is a little odd- the hacker is hired by whom? The company?
        Is the company checking up on the computer to defend it's customers?
        That looks either like the company making sure that there isn't a
        hidden program that's making them do something they don't want to do to
        their customers, or maybe someone else is checking to see if the
        company is defrauding them. The company has a right to make sure it's
        equipment isn't malfunctioning, and a clear responsibility to protect
        it's customers. I'm guessing you are inferring that information
        unnecessary to that would be collected on the way- or that simple the
        accumulation of that information would be an unacceptable security risk
        (as with the question of a national personal database). You probably
        have an example in mind that would make it clear, but I don't see it.
        But I do think that ethics should be applied in a situation analyzing
        risk/benefits. Is the risk of collected information being mis-used
        greater than the benefit of the intended use for that collected
        information?
        This goes right back to the core of the doing a reading or "etheric
        information gathering" question. I still think that gathering
        information is not intrinsically wrong- only the use (although I'll
        acknowledge the risk for potential abuse) is the ethical question.
        Tchipakkan
        "When I get some money, I buy books. If any is left over, I buy food
        and clothing." ~Erasmus


        Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
        var lrec_target="_top";var lrec_URL = new Array();lrec_URL[1] = "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=1295ucset/M=295196.4901138.6050264.3001176/D=groups/S=1705126283:HM/EXP=1083676559/A=1874383/R=0/id=flashurl/SIG=118tuuldn/*http://companion.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=srch";var link="javascript:LRECopenWindow(1)";var lrec_flashfile = 'http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ya/yahoo_companion/302_v1_pdt_lrec_01.swf?clickTAG='+link+'';var lrec_altURL = "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=1295ucset/M=295196.4901138.6050264.3001176/D=groups/S=1705126283:HM/EXP=1083676559/A=1874383/R=1/id=altimgurl/SIG=118tuuldn/*http://companion.yahoo.com/?.cpdl=srch";var lrec_altimg = "http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ya/yahoo_companion/302_v1_pdt_lrec_01.gif";var lrec_width = 300;var lrec_height = 250;

        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eastkingdomsoothsayersguild/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        eastkingdomsoothsayersguild-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Steve Mesnick
        ... The recent wildly overblown federal HIPAA law was *supposed* to make that easier. Check the NOPP (Notice of Privacy Practices) that
        Message 3 of 3 , May 5, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          tchipakkan wrote:
          > [Doctors tend to consider medical files THEIR private
          > information, not the patients, and it's damned difficult for patients
          > to get hold of their own medical information, whether they want to
          > share it or not.]

          The recent <opinion> wildly overblown </opinion> federal HIPAA law was
          *supposed* to make that easier. Check the NOPP (Notice of Privacy
          Practices) that you got from your doctor within the last year (you
          did get one, right?...if not, your doc could be in Deep Kimchee); it
          should have a paragraph on how to review and/or obtain your records.

          Steve Mesnick, RPh (& Privacy Officer)
          (Steffan has no idea what this is about)

          --
          Grant me the company of those who seek truth, and
          protect me from those who have found it.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.