Exploring an Ethical Dilemma

As an archivist, I will be faced with many ethical dilemmas throughout my career. As a means to demonstrate how I might address these issues in the future, I am creating this post to show the tools I can use and the thought process I might take when dealing with an ethical dilemma. To begin, let us look at an ethical dilemma.

The dilemma:

“In working on the arrangement and description of a collection, you come across a piece of information that is of a highly-sensitive nature and could change the perception of a major (still living) political figure. What should you do?”

This is a very interesting dilemma, especially with the current news coming from Hollywood and various political figures. It is important to understand how to best handle this situation. There are various tools an archivist can use when dealing with an ethical dilemma. These range from policies established by the organization that houses the archives, local and federal laws, and established professional standards.

One of these professional standards is the Code of Ethics that has been established by the Society of American Archivists (SAA). This Code of Ethics has various facets that could be used to resolve the above mentioned dilemma. Let us take a look at some of these facets to see how they would help.

The first one is Judgment. This code encourages archivists to use professional judgement when it comes to evaluating collections for acquisition and processing. In deciding what to do with the highly-sensitive information from the dilemma, using your best judgment along with consulting colleagues can help you determine how to proceed with processing this information.

The second one is Access and Use. This code addresses the access and restrictions that archivists put on various materials. Using the established institutional policies for access and restriction as a basis, an archivist can decide whether this policy is adequate for the materials in question, or if further restrictions need to be taken. The code also recommends consulting the donor to see if there were any restrictions that they would like put in place. However, even with input from the donor, it is ultimately the archivist’s decision on what restrictions, if any, should be placed on the items.

The third one is Privacy. This code reiterates the need to follow established privacy laws when dealing with archival materials. This seems pretty straight forward, but it can be a little complicated when trying to remain sensitive to confidential or culturally sensitive materials.

The fourth one is Trust. Archivists need to ensure that their practices and procedures do not compromise the trust that they are given by donors, researchers, and the communities they serve.

For this specific dilemma, the thought process I would take is as follows. The first step would be to determine the importance of the material in question. Does this material provide information that has a secondary importance? Does the material contain any information that would be considered Personally Identifiable Information (PII)?

Answering these two questions will allow me to determine the next step. If the answer is yes to the first question, then the second question helps us determine if there is any PII that needs to be redacted. Once the second question is answered, we can move forward.

The second step I would take is to consult the access and restriction policies established by the archives, any restrictions put in place by the donor, and any applicable privacy laws. If there are no specific instructions from the donor, I would consult with fellow colleagues to see how they might address the situation. If necessary, I would contact the donor to see if there was any restriction they would like placed on the materials. Using these tools, I would determine how to process the materials to best fulfill these requirements.

Finally, I would process the materials in a way that meets all the necessary restrictions or privacy laws, and make note of all of these within the finding aid. I would also document my process for this decision along with explanations as to why I made these decisions.

Ultimately I feel that no matter how sensitive the information is, if it has archival value, then it is my duty to preserve the materials. I would strive to maintain the privacy of the individual and any family members who may be affected by the information. However, I would not feel comfortable destroying the materials or denying access to the materials. I would strive to establish reasonable access and restriction guidelines that allow researchers to obtain the information while at the same time ensuring that the individual involved and his family are not going to suffer undue harm from the material being accessible in the archives. I would probably go so far as to restrict access to the material until after a certain period of time has elapsed after the person in question has passed away.

Overall, I feel that the decisions I have made in regards to this dilemma are the best decisions for preserving the materials while simultaneously protecting the individual’s privacy and not compromising other aspects of the work I do as an archivist.

Reference:

Society of American Archivists. (2016, September 23). SAA core values statement and code of ethics. Retrieved 18 November 2017 from https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-of-ethics