Child Location Tracking in the US and the UK: Same Technology, Different Social Implications

Real-time location tracking of individualshas become relatively easy with the widespread availability of commercial wearable devices that use geographical positioning information to provide location-based services. One application of this technology is to allow parents to monitor the location of their children. This paper investigates child location tracking technology in the US and the UK and compares its privacy implications. Although overall the price levels and the technical capabilities are the same, we find that the features of the technology are different depending on the social context. This can be attributed to national regulations and law that shape how a technology can be used. These laws and regulations, influenced by cultural frameworks, values, and morality, differ considerably between the countries. Clarifying the expected impacts of technology on the lives of users and other stakeholders in terms of these contextual factors will help to inform public debate about technical possibilities and societal needs.

[1]  Kristin Decker,et al.  Communication Technology And Society , 2016 .

[2]  Ian Loader,et al.  Tracking devices: On the reception of a novel security good , 2015 .

[3]  Asimina Vasalou,et al.  Child Location Tracking in the US and the UK: Same Technology, Different Social Implications , 2014 .

[4]  B. Goold,et al.  The moral economy of security , 2014 .

[5]  Anne-Marie McAlinden.  The governance of sexual offending across Europe: Penal policies, political economies and the institutionalization of risk , 2012 .

[6]  Asimina Vasalou,et al.  A case study of non-adoption: the values of location tracking in the family , 2012, CSCW.

[7]  Mike Nellis,et al.  'Cold Intimacies': Community Notification, Satellite Tracking and the Ruined Privacy of Sex Offenders , 2012, Managing Privacy through Accountability.

[8]  Patricia L. Bellia,et al.  The law of electronic surveillance , 2012 .

[9]  Katina Michael,et al.  Emerging Forms of Covert Surveillance Using GPS-Enabled Devices , 2011, J. Cases Inf. Technol..

[10]  Tonya Rooney,et al.  Trusting Children: How do surveillance technologies alter a child's experience of trust, risk and responsibility? , 2010 .

[11]  G. Marx,et al.  From the Beginning: Children as Subjects and Agents of Surveillance , 2010 .

[12]  Noam Shoval,et al.  Families’ and Professional Caregivers’ Views of Using Advanced Technology to Track People With Dementia , 2010, Qualitative health research.

[13]  Angelica Thumala,et al.  Consuming security? , 2010 .

[14]  Pixie‐dust and Privacy: What’s Happening to Children's Rights in England? , 2008 .

[15]  Heidi Mork Lomell,et al.  Technologies of InSecurity: The Surveillance of Everyday Life , 2008 .

[16]  F. Oswald,et al.  The use of advanced tracking technologies for the analysis of mobility in Alzheimer's disease and related cognitive diseases , 2008, BMC geriatrics.

[17]  Tim Gill.  Response to Review of No Fear: Growing Up in a Risk-Averse Society , 2007, Children, Youth and Environments.

[18]  Karen Malone,et al.  The bubble‐wrap generation: children growing up in walled gardens , 2007 .

[19]  Katina Michael,et al.  Control, trust, privacy, and security: evaluating location-based services , 2007, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.

[20]  Katina Michael,et al.  The Emerging Ethics of Humancentric GPS Tracking and Monitoring , 2006, 2006 International Conference on Mobile Business.

[21]  Katina Michael,et al.  Location-Based Services and the Privacy-Security Dichotomy , 2006 .

[22]  R. Pain,et al.  'So Long as I Take my Mobile': Mobile Phones, Urban Life and Geographies of Young People's Safety , 2005 .

[23]  F. Miskelly.  Electronic tracking of patients with dementia and wandering using mobile phone technology. , 2005, Age and ageing.

[24]  Evan Mayo-Wilson,et al.  Can electronic monitoring reduce crime for moderate to high-risk offenders? , 2005 .

[25]  G. Cradock.  Risk, Morality, and Child Protection: Risk Calculation as Guides to Practice , 2004 .

[26]  Waseem A. Karim.  The Privacy Implications of Personal Locators: Why You Should Think Twice Before Voluntarily Availing Yourself to GPS Monitoring , 2004 .

[27]  R. N. Mayer,et al.  Technology, Families, and Privacy: Can We Know Too Much About Our Loved Ones? , 2003 .

[28]  Shana K. Rahavy.  The Federal Wiretap Act: The Permissible Scope of Eavesdropping in the Family Home , 2003 .

[29]  Rob Kling,et al.  Learning About Information Technologies and Social Change: The Contribution of Social Informatics , 2000, Inf. Soc..

[30]  R. Bennett.  The Senate of the United States , 1999 .

[31]  Gill Valentine,et al.  Children's outdoor play: exploring parental concerns about children's safety and the changing nature of childhood , 1997 .

[32]  Herbert Burkert,et al.  Some Preliminary Comments on the DIRECTIVE 95/46/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. , 1996 .

[33]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change ed. by Wiebe E. Bijker, John Law (review) , 1994, Technology and Culture.

[34]  David Lyon,et al.  The Electronic Eye: The Rise of Surveillance Society , 1994 .

[35]  J. Wajcman.  Feminism Confronts Technology , 1991 .

[36]  Mayer Hillman,et al.  One False Move...: A Study of Children's Independent Mobility , 1991 .

[37]  H. Kunkel.  GENERAL INTRODUCTION , 1971, The Journal of experimental medicine.