|
|
|
|
RACING TOWARDS THE MARK
"And He causeth all, both
small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a
mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no
man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark"
Rev.13:16,17
An implanted chip to keep my child safe?
By Carol Midgley, The London Times
If your child could wear an implant—a microchip that could tell a
computer where he or she was at any time to within a few meters—would
you buy it? After the horrific snatch of three-year-old Madeleine McCann
from her bed in Portugal, the answer from many parents seems to be
"yes."
Professor Kevin Warwick, who developed the technology that made it
possible for the first child in Britain to volunteer to be "chipped" in
2002—after the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman—has recently
been bombarded with e-mails from parents desperate to keep tabs on their
children. As we talk, another e-mail drops into his inbox from a mother
of two young children who says that she is deeply anxious about
Madeleine's disappearance and wants to know more about the chip
technology.
It works, in theory, by sending a signal via a mobile-phone network to a
computer that can identify the child's location on an electronic map.
But Warwick hasn't developed the project.
There are, however, many other child-tracking devices on the market that
will almost certainly have a surge in sales now. They range from
pay-as-you-go tracking services that follow the SIM card in your child's
mobile phone to electronic wristbands and specially tagged pajamas. Some
companies have shied away from such gadgets, fearing legal actions from
parents should they fail for any reason, but others believe that the
gadgets are destined to become part of normal parenting.
The drawback with all these products, of course, is that an abductor
could quickly dispose of mobile phones, satchels, clothing or
wristbands.
The question that must also be asked is: Should we be tagging and
monitoring our children to such an extent? Is there a danger that we may
lose perspective and fill our children with suspicion and fear? Indeed,
could we become overreliant on technology and consequently more blasé
about basic supervision? Michelle Elliot, director of the child
protection charity Kidscape, says that she opposes the idea of microchip
implants but understands why many parents want to use phone-tracking
devices or wristbands.
She worries, however, that such devices might hamper children's
develop-ment of a sense of independence. "It doesn't teach them what to
do in a problem situation—e.g., if you are lost, go into a shop," she
says. Of implants, she says: "We don't know what the physiological
effects would be—and a child isn't giving informed consent to what is a
minor operation on their body."
But when children are abducted from bed, a nonremovable permanent chip
is something that some parents would welcome, regardless of the ethics.
Professor Warwick says that if there was sufficient demand from the
public and the initiative was backed by child-safety groups, it would
not be difficult to make chip implants available nationally in a
relatively short period of time.
(Commentary) In an increasingly insecure world, implants are coming.
Where there's such a need, you can be sure that businesses will step in
to fill it, and govern-ments will rush to authorize it. No doubt they're
already working on plans for such chips—with the encouragement of the
Devil,
since such devices simplify his plans for the future considerably.
If he can get people used to the idea of chips
embedded in their bodies and demonstrate all their "advantages," then
the world has moved a lot closer to his Mark of the Beast and a
financial system based on it.
[end of article]
Links to Related Articles:
back to top
|
|
