Mormon Discussion’s podcast production is certainly not connected to The Mormon Church aka The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It also is most assuredly not approved or endorsed by Intellectual Reserve, Inc or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Any of the awesome content or the solid opinions expressed, implied or included in Mormon Discussion Inc’s awesome podcast lineup and production are solely those of Mormon Discussion Inc. and/or its program hosts and not those of Intellectual Reserve, Inc. or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Mormon Discussion Inc is a 501(c)(3) and is in the arena of journalistic work and is part of a free press. A free press is fundamental to a democratic society. It seeks out and circulates news, information, ideas, comment and opinion and holds those in authority to account. The press provides the platform for a multiplicity of voices to be heard. At national, regional and local level, it is the public’s watchdog, activist and guardian as well as educator, entertainer and contemporary chronicler. Under the “fair use” defense, however, another author may make limited use of the original author’s work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism.
The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner’s exclusive rights.
Subject to some general limitations discussed later in this article, the following types of uses are usually deemed fair uses:
- Criticism and commentary: for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment. A book reviewer would be permitted to quote passages from a book in a newspaper column, for example, as part of an examination of the book.
- News reporting: such as summarizing an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report. A journalist would be permitted to quote from a political speech’s text without the politician’s permission.
- Research and scholarship: perhaps quoting a short passage in a scholarly, scientific, or technical work for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations. An art historian would be able to use an image of a painting in an academic article that analyzes the painting.
- Nonprofit educational uses: for example, when teachers photocopy limited portions of written works for classroom use. An English teacher would be permitted to copy a few pages of a book to show to the class as part of a lesson plan.
- Parody: that is, a work that ridicules another, usually well-known, work by imitating it in a comic way. A comedian could quote from a movie star’s speech in order to make fun of that star.
Thank you, thank you for this episode!
My wife and I loved this episode and plan on having similar talks with our children!
I know we are late to this podcast (just now going through them), so hopefully you see this comment, but I’m curious to know your thoughts about the possible exception to this rule at doctors visits.
I’m a current family medicine resident and see all ages of kids to adults to the elderly. During training we were always taught that around the time of Jr High school we should invite the parents to step out of the room so we could confidentially ask adolescent patient questions about tobacco (vaping is huge right now), alcohol, and sex and provide medically relevant teaching and recommendations regarding these behaviors (STIs, birth control, risks of substance use, etc). Adolescents are told that this is beginning of physician-patient confidentiality and that we would not reveal anything to the parents without their permission unless they are a harm to themselves or others. The reason behind this practice is that adolescents were less likely to endorse these behaviors in front of their parents. Of course, any sensitive examination at my clinic is done with a MA or RN present as a sort of ‘chaperone’ and the parent will stay or leave depending on the preference of the adolescent (17-year-old boys often kicking out their mothers).
I personally see the value of this private interview in the medical context as several patients who have denied drugs, alcohol, or sexual activity in front of their parents have completely reversed answers to these questions when parents have stepped out of the room. I was then able to subsequently provide appropriate counseling or treatment as applicable. And even more frequently adolescents have asked me questions about tobacco, vaping, or even acne treatment that they felt uncomfortable discussing with their parents around.
You two obviously felt strongly about this issue and I was wondering how you feel about a possible “doctor” exception. From your perspective, what can the doctor do to make things as comfortable as possible for the parents while still providing the opportunity for adolescents to discuss their own medical care privately (if desired)?
I hope you see this and look forward to your answer as I’m sure many parents feel similarly as you do. Thanks so much and my wife and I look forward to listening to the rest of your podcasts.