ACLU ISSUES ALARM ABOUT MIDDLETOWN PLAN TO ELECTRONICALLY MONITOR SCHOOL CHILDREN (1/7/2008)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: media@aclu.org
Claiming that the program
raises “enormous privacy and
safety concerns,” the RI ACLU has called on
Middletown school officials to halt a planned pilot program in which elementary
school children will be tagged with electronic chips to monitor their
whereabouts. The program, using Radio
Frequency Identification (RFID) technology, will track the movements of
Aquidneck Elementary School students who take school district buses by placing
RFID chips on the children’s backpacks.
The only rationale offered
for this significant intrusion is to allow school officials to know whether
students boarded the right bus. But in a letter to school officials, the ACLU
said it hoped that “this is a goal that school district procedures already
address without the need to tag and track students like cattle. The use of RFID
labels on the children is a solution in search of a problem.”
The letter added that this
incursion on students’ privacy “could also have the effect of actually making
the children less, rather than more, safe. That is because any information
stored on an RFID chip that identifies a particular child, whether it be by
name, address or school ID number, can potentially be read from a distance by
inexpensive readers that can be easily purchased on the Internet. If school
officials can find schoolchildren, others might also be able to find them and
target them for improper purposes.” The letter notes that RFID technology was
originally developed to track products and cattle, and that many independent
researchers who specialize in RFID technology have raised privacy and security
concerns about using this technology for tagging humans.
The ACLU also protested
that requiring students to wear RFID labels “treats them as objects, not
children,” like the cattle, sheep and shipment pallets in warehouses for which
the technology was designed. Further, “encouraging the placement of RFIDs on
young children, even in this limited and questionable context, can only have the
unintended effect of acclimating them to being monitored by the government in
other contexts and wherever they go, as if it were perfectly normal and
appropriate. It is not, nor is it a notion that a school district should be
encouraging, however unintentionally.”
The ACLU argued that the
school district had failed to give sufficient weight to these concerns in
adopting the policy with little debate. When a similar, but even less intrusive,
program was introduced a few years ago in a California school system – requiring
students to wear RFID badges while they were actually in school – an
outcry from parents led to its quick abandonment. The ACLU concluded its letter
to the school officials by urging them “to respect the privacy and civil
liberties of Middletown’s elementary school students and reconsider this
decision before the program is implemented on these children.”
|