Welcome to those few of you who are not adorning a beach somewhere, and I offer my commiseration. Let’s try to entertain you by persuading you to resolve a dilemma involving rights to information and privacy. My challenge to you is, not only do you have to decide who has the right, but to devise more real world scenarios that bring these new issues and old rights together in conflict. Attend:

You are an individual of mixed race, both races minority (for convenience think Asian and African). You can pass as full-blooded in either race and often do. You have a child or children from a previous relationship. And you are ill.

As part of your treatment you need genetic analysis of predisposition towards several disease pathways. You are frightened that exposure of the results will a) reveal your mixed race heritage and b) prejudice your employability, insurability and sociability. So you agree with your consultant to test under an alias. And your treatment proceeds and you get on with your life.

Unbeknownst to you (does Beyonce have an evil twin called UnBeyonce?), your consultant also treats your child/children from a previous relationship, and recognizes that your genetic results are relevant to them. Your consultant knows that you would refuse to release your information, but their continued good health is dependent on having this information available. Just for the sake of preserving the moral dilemma, getting the genetic information from the children is not adequate, sufficient or practical (they live now in a foreign country, or something like that).

1. Is your right to control of information regarding your genetic history absolute?
2. Does your consultant have ethical responsibilities to act despite your desire for secrecy?
3. If sperm donors are required to disclose identity to their children, is a precedent established for requiring you to yield your genetic information?
4. Who should make the final decision?

Extra points for better dilemmas in the comments.