Privacy dichotomy

An array of medical conditions have come to my attention where right to
life (to fullest potential) should transcend the right to privacy.  In such
cases, particularly those that incur amnesia related symptoms; where
medical treatment becomes unavailable as a result. The medical benefits of
a protected foot-print for medical purposes far out-weights the benefits of
ordinary human rights assessments as to protect the safety of the person
affected in addition to the impacts upon those around them which may be
otherwise misunderstood by the uninitiated in a crisis event, for example.

I believe these forms of use-cases transcend the needs of counter-terrorism
and other law-enforcement requirements should a suitably qualified clinical
/ medical actor be capable of reviewing and interpreting records
effectively as to provide case-management.

However; i also note that criminal elements may engage those suffering from
such difficulties as to obfuscate their roles / activities and related
documentation (ie: company directorships). This is not a tenably validated
reason to support privacy above all other things and brings into question
data-retention requirements more broadly. \

Other situations may involve 'digital hostage' styled use-cases and
overall; these matters need to be addressed on a multitude of levels
including digital, political, law and operational policies.  I believe a
distinction exists between those who are victimised into a situation vs.
those who are otherwise healthy leaders and participants of activities
harmful to others.  I also believe our works have moreover focused on
attention towards the activities of those who are in good-health, rather
than in consideration of those who are trapped or otherwise not-well /
'free' and capable to make appropriate decisions of their own will.
Related to this use-case is one of agents acting in inappropriate  manners
and these use-cases imho are particularly relevant for public servants
(gov, law-enforcement, bureaucracy, etc.).

The objective here is to ensure that we're not attempting to support human
rights at the cost of the most vulnerable.  saying we don't want to be
tracked, can harm those who are being enslaved.  We need a human centric
web.  i see differentiators between that and our service orientated
heritage.

I suggest inherent within these concepts are an array of situation that may
well warrant effective medical use-case production.  Everyone is vulnerable
from these sorts of things; yet, none of us wish our vulnerabilities as
'flesh' to diminish our rights against the values of 'tools' (ie:
companies, organised groups, hammers, machines, etc.).  Yet if we are doing
something that threatens our own wellbeing and that of others around us; i
imagine we'd all want effective protections as to provide us 'social
security'.

Tim.H.