Woman Calls Out Doctor Wearing Smart Glasses During Consultation Where She Had To Take Off Her Clothes: 'They Need To Be Banned'

I can honestly put up with a lot, especially in a doctor’s office. Hell it’s the only place I’m okay with something up my ass. I would walk out if my doctor came in with those glasses. I will go and find a new doctor. There is no way I am okay with a personal camera in that exam room.

I totally get what you’re saying.

However, it is kind of funny (interesting?) that people will trust that there isn’t a hidden camera in the exam room without question, but mistrust someone who has a camera openly displayed, but off, in the exam room. As if the reminder that cameras exist is what negates that trust, not the risk of being recorded.

This is more of a philosophical musing than a defense of wearing a camera into an exam room.

That’s because there is generally implicit trust that there is no hidden cameras. The open display of a camera effectively destroys that trust. If everyone was always suspicious of there being hidden cameras everywhere, functioning in society would be pretty difficult.

Sure, but if a person doesn’t trust their doctor to have a camera in their possession in the room, why would they trust that same doctor not to have one hidden?

That’s what I’m saying. They have that trust and the visible camera would destroy it in an instant because it’s expected to be private. You can’t expect people to assume that there will be something that shouldn’t be there and validate that fact.

Does it matter whether the camera is on or off?

Don’t get me wrong here, I’m not advocating for bodyworn cameras (or any cameras) in exam rooms, on or off-- I just find it interesting where the line is.

From my perspective, if you think your doctor is a creep enough to surreptitiously record you in the exam room using a camera that’s on their face, then you can’t rule out that they’d do it in ways that would be more difficult to detect. And if you do trust them not to record you with a hidden camera, then that trust should extend to a camera in plain sight.

At the end of the day, people have a right to be comfortable in these situations with their doctor, regardless of if it makes logical sense. I hope I didn’t come off suggesting otherwise.

You are not understanding the trust issue.

By default, patents trust doctors with their bodies so they don’t expect the doctor to do shady stuff like record them with a hidden camera. However, the moment they see something that suggest they might be recording,then the hidden voice awakens and questions everything the doctor has done in a new, not so trustworthy way.

It’s not that patients think that doctors who wear those glasses won’t have a hidden camera too, it’s that doctors who have those glasses might also have a hidden camera, it’s the fact that they have those glasses that opens the patient to other shady possibilities.

As others have said, trust is broken.

These hypothetical doctors almost certainly have a smartphone with them every time they enter the room. Why doesn’t that trigger this loss of trust effect? That can certainly (and arguably more easily) secretly record audio and video.

I just thought it was interesting.

Smartphones haven’t been called “pervert boxes”. It’s the implication of what someone that would buy and wear the glasses would also be able to do.

We implicitly trust doctors just because doctors are generally trustworthy for body things. At the same time, the pervert glasses are called pervert glasses because people have used them for that stuff and we implicitly distrust people that wear them because of the implication.

So if I see a doctor with pervert glasses on even go they are not recording, I’m immediately distrustful of their phone too. The trust of them being a doctor is immediately broken.

I hope I was clear, it’s not if the phones can more easily record or not, it’s the current general perception of those glasses and how it warps peoples perception of others.

I don’t know how old you are, but when smartphones were first on the market there was real concern that people (presumably “perverts”) would use them to take pictures of people without their knowledge. I recall that there was even a push for legislation to require smartphone cameras to make noises when taking a picture, in response to this concern.

And look at how you’re describing them. “Pervert glasses”. Are legally blind people who use this technology to better navigate the world “perverts”?

It seems like the real concern is that so-called smart glasses are new, not that they actually change much. If/When they become aa commonplace as phones, I’m guessing no one will even notice them, just as we do with everyone having a phone.