Thesis. 1976. M.S.--Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Political Science. / Microfiche copy available in Archives and Dewey. / Includes bibliographical references. / M.S.

No description available.

Not available / text

The legal system and the social sciences share an interest in privacy but have developed separate conceptualizations of the concept. The result is two similar but conflicting theories of privacy that make different assumptions about how people behave and how that behavior can be controlled. The purpose of this study was to begin testing these theories by examining the operationalization of privacy through mandated standards intended to ensure privacy for the mentally ill. Specifically, the standards set in Wyatt v. Stickney, which reflect the idea that privacy is a sphere of space free from outside intrusion, were examined to see if they did indeed ensure privacy. Using two units in a facility that met the standards mandated by the court in Wyatt v. Stickney, the research examined staff and patient perceptions of privacy. Thirty-five patients were interviewed and twenty-four staff completed questionnaires on the overall habitability of the unit and patient privacy. Results indicated that the Wyatt court's operationalization of privacy as primarily a visual phenomena was inadequate and although the specific standards ordered to ensure privacy were reported to be effective by a simple majority of patients, overall patients reported a lack of privacy. Staff responses were generally in agreement with patients but they tended to use more extreme or stronger ratings. The present study also has implications for the legal conceptualization of privacy. It was found that privacy was perceived as important by patients; that autonomy as evidenced by control was an important issue for a minority of patients; and, the right of selective disclosure was not a major concern of patients. Needed future areas of research that were identified included: comparing privacy ratings across a variety of group living situations, comparing the mentally ill's conceptualizations of privacy from others, determining the effect of privacy on the therapeutic goals of an institution and therapeutic outcome and, determine the relative importance of privacy to the mentally ill.

Not available / text

No description available.

The conflict inherent in balancing freedom of the press and the right to privacy invariably presents some controversial legal issues. In addressing the legal dilemmas posed by these competing interests, an in-depth analysis of the conceptual value of these two equally important rights becomes a preliminary starting point. Through its exploration of the history and development of the press and privacy laws in both the United States and Canada, this thesis examines the fundamental values enshrined in these two rights. The author holds that the freedom of the press contains no privilege under the law, but that it serves as the means to promote the public's right to know in a democratic society, while the right to privacy offers an individual the autonomy to regulate his private affairs. By analyzing arguments of "pubic interest," "public figure," and "public privacy," the author compares the theoretical approaches to and practical attempts at striking a balance between the interests of the press and the privacy of the individual in the United States and Canada. Finally, the essay proposes how these experiences may contribute to the construction of relevant Chinese laws.

This thesis examines the change towards a property-based view of information in the fields of copyright, database protection and data privacy. Focus will be placed on the United States and the European Union, as those territories together are responsible for more than half of the world's Internet population. The thesis will attempt to show that a view of information as personal property is not actually benefiting society in general and is dangerous for future progress: economic, scientific and social. The thesis suggests balancing the restrictions on access to information as a whole, meaning viewing the restrictions in copyright, database protection and privacy laws to see how they together affect access to information. It argues that these fields of law should supplement each other in maximizing social welfare through a baseline of public access as opposed to a baseline of monopoly.

No description available.

No description available.