When an Individual's Private Acts should become a Public Concern

There are times when an individual's private acts should become a public concern.
Describe a specific situation in which an individual's private acts should not become a public concern. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the acts of an individual should become a public concern.
___

The right of privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution. However, the 9th Amendment maintains that just because a certain right is not mentioned in the Constitution does not give government the liberty to trample on it. Courts, indeed, have set multiple precedents for a right to privacy through cases---the most famous of which include issues related to contraception, abortion and interracial marriage. In our democracy, the right of privacy is a cornerstone of the American way of life. However, an individual in certain situations cannot invoke the right of privacy in relation to his private acts. This is especially relevant where one's private acts have become a public concern.

Private acts can become a matter of public concern, especially in regards to society's interest in maintaining the public's safety. For instance, when a man is rumored to be abusing the neighborhood's children, the community has a right to alert families of a possible danger and pursue an investigation to seek justice. Sometimes private "none-acts" also may become public concern. When a neighbor fails to maintain his property and yard, the "none-act" could affect the value of surrounding homes and land. An unkempt property could also attract shady figures and drive away prospective buyers of nearby property.

A person who performs public services also should be held in a higher standard---which may cause their private acts to become a matter of public concern. For example, politicians are expected to uphold a high degree of virtue and honesty because the public has entrusted them with managing public coffers and making decisions that would benefit society in the whole. When a politician is caught in a dishonest financial controversy (e.g., not paying fair share of taxes) or failing to uphold familial duties (e.g., adultery), the public has a right to be concerned. The demonstration of a less than virtuous nature undercuts his reputation as a trustworthy public servant capable of performing his duties in a competent manner.

Private actions that have no impact on others and do not harm society should not be of public concern. For instance, the Supreme Court has held that the government could no longer punish an adult couple for engaging in consensual sodomy. Their private sexual acts have no impact on society as a whole and do not affect the community's safety. Whether a certain private act should implicate public concern is often difficult to determine; sometimes the courts have had to set their own guidelines that may be deemed arbitrary by society. The abortion debate with Roe v. Wade is an example of how government has attempted to outline when exactly an act of abortion becomes public concern. Based on a certain line of reasoning, the justices specifically lists a time cut-off when abortion ceases to be a wholly private act of the mother and rather a concern for the public.. In any given controversial issue, some people will differ with the courts as far as when a certain private act should become a public concern.

Furthermore, the government's guidelines to when private acts become public concerns are also
reflected by the defamation/libel laws. For instance, public figures who wish to file a defamation claim---that is, a lawsuit accusing another person or organization of spreading untrue claims about his person must meet higher standards to win a claim. Unlike persons deemed "private citizens," public figures must prove the additional requirement of " the intent of malice" in the part of the person or organization spreading the alleged lies. This higher standard that must be met by public figures is partly due to the fact that by virtue of their fame and involvement in the public sphere, they should expect more public scrutiny and will naturally be more vulnerable to the spread of "untruths."

Defining whether a private act becomes a public concern is a rather subjective exercise and the answers will vary from person to person based on their biases and philosophical backgrounds. However, a court or other authority figure may need to set guidelines in interest of maintaining order in society and upholding standards to protect vulnerable individuals.