Hmmm, well in this case I'd think that they should only be able to seize that information during a criminal proceeding, when they have a warrent. This is a civil matter, at least in it's current form.
What's more the nature of claims based on photos like that are ambigious to begin with, just as they are in insurance cases. Unless someone is making a claim of being bed ridden or something, being able to engage in occasional physical activity is more or less meaningless. Photos of the person at their best mean nothing since by definition nobody is taking pictures of themselves (or being snooped) when they are say laying in a fetal position on their bed, wracked with pain.
When it comes to disabillity, being fine 95% of the time is enough to make you unemployable because that 5% of the time means everything to a boss. If you say can't do your job 1 day out of 20 because of some problem whether it's physical or psychological that's enough to be fairly considered disabled since nobody is going to put that person on payroll knowing that, or not fire them due to the problem... excepting cases where it's a "workplace" injury, keeping a job when your disabled is one thing, but finding a new one is differant. For example when I became disabled and my problems started effecting my job it took quite a bit to get rid of me, even when they decided they wanted to.
