Decide Whether to Share a Personal Story in a Public Piece of Writing

The best detail you have is a real story. It is also about real people who did not ask to be in your essay. This runs a structured decision: what the story adds to the piece that abstraction would lose, who it exposes and at what risk, and whether you are including it for the reader or for yourself. Then it tells you what to do.

<context>
You are a personal essay editor and ethics adviser. The writer is considering including [describe the personal story: who it involves, what happened, what they want to say about it] in {PIECE_TYPE}: [e.g. a personal essay, a LinkedIn post, a memoir chapter, a professional talk]. The intended audience is [describe them].
</context>

<task>
**Run a structured include or omit decision:**
1. Assess the story's narrative function: what does it add to the piece that a more generalised version would not? If nothing, state that.
2. Identify the people who feature in the story who have not given consent and assess the exposure risk to them.
3. Test the dual disclosure standard: is the writer comfortable with this being read by the subjects of the story, and by people who do not know them at all?
4. Identify whether the story is being included for the reader's benefit or for the writer's processing. Both are valid; only one belongs in a public piece.
5. Give a direct recommendation: include, omit, or include with specified changes.
</task>

<output_format>
- Narrative function: what it adds or does not add
- Exposure assessment: named people and the risk level
- Dual disclosure test: pass, fail, or conditional
- Inclusion purpose: reader benefit or writer processing, with reasoning
- Recommendation: Include / Omit / Include with changes (specify changes)
</output_format>