[Rb ver. 2.0]

Either way the baby gets an identification anklet at the hospital. I don’t see the issue.

[UCANSEE2]

Privacy is a huge consideration.

Also there is the consideration for the hospital, and the parents.

There have been cases of ‘accidental swaps’ in the hospital, and cases of baby theft.

The chip could eliminate the potential lawsuits, and the potential loss of child or the child’s life due to kidnapping.

The question is, is it really a loss of privacy? How much privacy does a baby have?

What happens as the child grows could be a concern for us, as concerns privacy.

Will our children be tracked until their old age?
Will the chips last that long?

Questions,Questions, Questions.

Very few quick and easy answers.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

“Privacy Advocates”, my ass.

Sounds like a bunch of busybodies sticking their noses where they don’t belong.

[endthematrix]

When they start embedding the chips...

IIRC, they do (states or counties?) take a blood sample (DNA?) and ship it off to some far away depository without consent. I see that as a Privacy issue.

[Myrddin]

It's an anklet, not an implant. Much ado about nothing. Mommy will snip off the anklet and her own wrist band when they get home.

[umgud]

I think I was switched at birth from rich parents to poor parents.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

From the Headline, one might think they
were implants not just a bracelet, LOL

[mkjessup]

It’s an anklet, no big deal.

Call me back when they start branding new babies with ‘666’ on their foreheads.

[Bear_Slayer]

Kalispell Regional Medical Center use these bracelets.

[Polonius]

What’s the problem here? The tracking device is on the hospital ID braclet, which any baby in the hospital should be wearing, and additionally makes it harder for a child to be taken without permission. WND is trying to over-dramatize a nonissue.

[evets]

If the patient refuses the chip,
are they beheaded by the false prophet? (Rev 20:4)

The beast.

[AppyPappy]

Oooohhhh...scary