The minor's right of privacy: limitations on state action after Danforth and Carey.

The current status of the minor's right of privacy is examined, and the possible interests of parents and the state in controlling the minor's childbearing decisions is evaluated. Attention is directed to the development of an adult right of privacy and the potential barriers blocking its full extension to minors. The impact of the Danforth and Carey decisions extended the right of privacy to protect a minor's childbearing decisions from unwarranted state interference, and the constitutionality of statues that predicate a minor's abortion or contraceptive decision on either prior parental notification or parental judicial approval. The scope and vitality of the protection afforded by the Danforth and Carey decisions will be largely undermined if a minor's fundamental decisions are held to be constitutionally subject to parental or judicial review. State-mandated involvement of 3rd parties, aside from the minor's attending physician, in the decision to prevent or terminate pregnancy serves no significant state interest. Rather such restrictions impermissibly subject minors to the dangers of pregnancy and childbirth. Additionally, by selectively burdening only those childbearing decisions which result in the prevention or termination of pregnancy, parental consent, consultation, and notification requirements violate the Roe decision's insistence on a neutral state policy towards the outcome of fundamental personal choices. In sum, state-assisted parental or judicial intervention in the minor's childbearing decisions unconstitutionally limits the protection granted by the right of privacy.     

Polygraphs: Erosion of the privacy right

The polygraph is a machine which invades previously private regions in the human being. Its operation is often viewed simplistically and lacking in danger. Such naivete is the subject of this comment. The paper considers the mechanics of polygraph operation, and its theoretical basis; the legal admissibility of the polygraph in a variety of settings, and lastly the impact the polygraph has upon our private lives.Clearly, the polygraph intrudes on the private regions of each individual, and this frightening fact is cause enough to consider the human, social and constitutional implications of its use. The project considers the reliability factor of the polygraph and its questionable use in personnel and business settings; its use in disciplinary procedures and labor arbitration, as well as reviews its place in judicial process and criminal review.Most critically the paper attempts to arrive at a constitutional basis for restrictions on its use in the private sector. Ingenious arguments have been made by opponents of the polygraph, and this paper reviews the substance and content of these constitutional arguments.     

Constitutional limitations of the privacy framework advanced in Eisenstadt v. Baird and Roe v. Wade

This paper examines the role of framing in advancing a progressive sexual and reproductive rights agenda. U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Griswold v. Connecticu and Eisenstadt v. Baird helped establish legal precedent invoking a ＂privacy framework＂ for subsequent cases including Roe v. Wade （as well as Doe v. Bolton and, more recently, Lawrence v. Texas）. This paper highlights the limitations of the privacy framework while exploring more potentially efficacious frames.     

GPS tracking and the right of privacy

Government authorities and law enforcement agencies start using the satellite-based GPS tracking technology more often for various purposes. Due to its unique technical features, GPS tracking poses a much greater threat to the right of privacy compared with traditional electronic tracking techniques, such as the Beeper. Comparisons are extensively analyzed and a number of the US cases are quoted for illustrations. In the end, several key principles are proposed to facilitate the supervision of investigation behaviors in China.