3 ms·

Does it? I was not aware of that. I know that my state, Pennsylvania, does no such collection -- or at least it did not a decade ago when my children were being

by mcherm 11y ago

Does it? I was not aware of that. I know that my state, Pennsylvania, does no such collection -- or at least it did not a decade ago when my children were being born.

gojomo 11y ago
My impression is that the collection is so routine and automatic that most parents don't even notice it's happening, and would need to assert themselves in advance in writing to exercise their religious opt-out. This site suggests Pennsylvania's policies for sample retention (8 months) and use of results (by subject and their medical provider only) are more restrictive than "save indefinitely" states like California: http://www.babysfirsttest.org/newborn-screening/states/pennsylvania http://www.babysfirsttest.org/newborn-screening/states/penns...
- mc32 11y ago
  Yeah, during newborn delivery there is so much going on, most parents will not notice that this happens at all. So my question is what leg does the EFF stand on when making this complaint?
  - bmelton 11y ago
    > So my question is what leg does the EFF stand on when making this complaint? The honorable Carol Yaggy, trial judge for the superior court of San Francisco. http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/revpub/A125542M.PDF http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/revpub/A125542M.PDF If indeed DNA is being collected at birth, without consent, the EFF would have similar grounds to object to that. If an act is against the law, it doesn't matter that the state is breaking that same law in another instance. Breaking the law twice doesn't validate it, or, as my first grade teacher Mrs. Thompson might have said, two wrongs don't make a right.
    - mc32 11y ago
      It does and people are aware. It's offered as screening for diseases, etc. Few parents opt out. Fingerprints are also collected at DMV, they should look into that, afaik, there is no opt out, except not getting an ID.

3 ms·

Does it? I was not aware of that. I know that my state, Pennsylvania, does no such collection -- or at least it did not a decade ago when my children were being

by mcherm 11y ago

Does it? I was not aware of that. I know that my state, Pennsylvania, does no such collection -- or at least it did not a decade ago when my children were being born.

gojomo 11y ago
My impression is that the collection is so routine and automatic that most parents don't even notice it's happening, and would need to assert themselves in advance in writing to exercise their religious opt-out. This site suggests Pennsylvania's policies for sample retention (8 months) and use of results (by subject and their medical provider only) are more restrictive than "save indefinitely" states like California: http://www.babysfirsttest.org/newborn-screening/states/pennsylvania http://www.babysfirsttest.org/newborn-screening/states/penns...
- mc32 11y ago
  Yeah, during newborn delivery there is so much going on, most parents will not notice that this happens at all. So my question is what leg does the EFF stand on when making this complaint?
  - bmelton 11y ago
    > So my question is what leg does the EFF stand on when making this complaint? The honorable Carol Yaggy, trial judge for the superior court of San Francisco. http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/revpub/A125542M.PDF http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/revpub/A125542M.PDF If indeed DNA is being collected at birth, without consent, the EFF would have similar grounds to object to that. If an act is against the law, it doesn't matter that the state is breaking that same law in another instance. Breaking the law twice doesn't validate it, or, as my first grade teacher Mrs. Thompson might have said, two wrongs don't make a right.
    - mc32 11y ago
      It does and people are aware. It's offered as screening for diseases, etc. Few parents opt out. Fingerprints are also collected at DMV, they should look into that, afaik, there is no opt out, except not getting an ID.