> As it should.
Not in this case. These screenings detect serious diseases, and skipping them will have serious health consequences for many people:
https://www.chop.edu/conditions-diseases/newborn-screening-t...: here's just one of the things they test for:
> Phenylketonuria (PKU). PKU is an inherited disease in which the body cannot metabolize a protein called phenylalanine. It is estimated that one in every 10,000 to 15,000 babies is born with PKU in the U.S. Without treatment, PKU can cause intellectual disability. Newborn screening for PKU is required in all 50 states.
IIRC, babies with that condition need to be put on a special formula ASAP, or they'll have problems.
> So far, data collection rarely benefits the people the data are collected from.
That may be true, but it's lazy and incorrect to assume that it's correct to proceed like it never benefits anyone.
What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Hospitals are businesses optimizing for their bottom line, not for patient benefit. Law-enforcement has a lot of funding. Sharing data (obtained from humans without a fully developed consciousness) with law enforcement (for whatever purposes they want) is a massive overreach and has nothing to do with providing care for the patient. So, their best interest is not your best interest, but we should trust them implicitly?