Genealogy has exploded in popularity in recent years for a variety of
reasons, one of them being the increase in online genealogical
resources. The Internet has certainly drawn new enthusiasts, who are
attracted by the convenience of the vast number of genealogical
databases now available with a click of a mouse. The information found
in these databases reduces the amount of time spent searching through
pages of crumbling ledgers or scrolling through endless rolls of
microfilm, and for today's time-challenged researcher, the Internet is
an attractive option. Digitizing vital records for the purpose of making
them available online is a convenience for genealogists and state
agencies alike, and marketing these records is a lucrative business for
many states.
Ada Greenblatt of New Jersey began researching her
family history nine years ago, in March 1993. While purely a hobbyist,
her research has since become a serious investigative project and a
quasi-public service as she posts databases and web pages related to her
ancestral towns on the Internet. Like many Americans searching for
information about their ancestors, she expects vital records and other
documents traditionally considered "public" information to be readily
available. If the information is not available online, then a government
agency should furnish it, albeit with some degree of bureaucracy. When
she recently posted $4.00 to receive a death record from the New Jersey
Department of Health, she received a shock in addition to her uncashed
check: she would only be sent the record if she could supply the first,
middle, and last names of the deceased; the exact date and place of
event; the maiden name of the mother of the deceased and the father's
name (if recorded). The letter firmly concludes: No Exceptions.
It
became obvious to Mrs. Greenblatt that the state of New Jersey, without
saying as much, was limiting their release of vital records to
immediate family members. New Jersey, a state that had previously been
more lenient with this kind of information, had become one of the most
restrictive states in the U.S. Even some of the states that are now
restricting birth records to prevent identity theft from the living have
no such restrictions on death records. Ms. Greenblatt noted, "I can
understand this policy for birth records to protect those who are still
living, but for deaths it doesn't make sense. It's another blow to
genealogists and a big one too because of the size of its population.
Indeed, New Jersey is the most densely populated site in the union."
In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United
States, it became known that several of the terrorists used fraudulent
identities and may have planned the attacks through access to government
information. As a result, new scrutiny was placed on how this data is
obtained and many states have implemented new restrictions on
information that had previously been considered public. This in turn
brought attention to the practice of selling information to electronic
database vendors, which has caused the current uproar over the
availability of this data on commercial genealogy web sites.
After
an article appeared in the San Jose Mercury News in November
2001 about genealogy web sites and their links to official records,
Governor Gray Davis of California, citing privacy concerns, instituted a
45-day
ban on sales of these records to private companies until further
review. When rootsweb.com agreed to remove the name of any person
upon request, they were besieged with emails from concerned
individuals.
By now, no one can disagree that identity theft is a
serious and growing problem. In January 2002, the Federal Trade
Commission reported that identity theft was the number one
consumer-fraud complaint reported in 2001, involving 42 percent of all
complaints. In light of the new security concerns, seventeen states have
proposed rules on limiting access to public records. However, even
prior to the September 11 attacks, many states were already placing
restrictions on access to public information. Last year, the Texas
Department of Health removed their 1926-1996 online database of births
in Texas from in response to a number of complaints about adopted
individuals trying to illegally contact their birth parents. They had
hoped to restore the database after instituting security measures, but
in the wake of the terrorist attacks, federal security issues took
precedence over public convenience. After a period of review, it appears
unlikely that California or Texas will reverse their positions anytime
soon.
While it is hoped that legislators are acting to protect
citizens, there are concerns that the states are using the issue of
security and personal privacy as an excuse to lock up information. In
recent years, journalists have also found roadblocks when attempting to
access records that they previously had been able to obtain online.
Historically, it has been much easier for American journalists to gather
information than it has been for their European counterparts. The
Freedom of Information Act, which allows journalists to access
government information, does not exist in Europe. Additionally, Europe
generally has strict privacy laws regarding personal information. Some
journalists lament that the "good old days" are over, referring to the
treasure troves of information they used to access from their PC
desktops. Genealogists can certainly sympathize with the concerns of
these journalists. After all, genealogy would not be enjoying its
current popularity if research was still limited to numerous trips to
repositories and endless hours of studying microfilm.
Finding a
balance between security and public access involves and affects
everyone. Measures are already being considered in many other areas, and
commonly accepted procedures, such as a financial institution asking
for a mother's maiden name as a password (a crucial component in
identity fraud), are now being challenged. Whatever the future holds, it
is important that the public is informed of these developments, as they
affect not only the essential "tools of the trade" of genealogists and
journalists, but also impact the most basic freedoms that American
cherish.
Leigh Montgomery is a news librarian at the Christian
Science Monitor newspaper.