Ethics Issue

I'm going to offer a long read here from Grantland.  Take a look at the article and please answer the poll.  The short version: someone wants to write an article about the amazing putter this woman created.  He starts to investigate her, and finds out she's a transsexual and much of her background was falsified.  The Dr later kills herself.  Obviously there's a lot more to the story than that.

You can find more information by googling Dr V Putter.

I found a compelling argument here, but I think some of his premises are false, or at least stretches.

There's no way of knowing why Dr V made up her history but how would you reconcile the fact that you transitioned with the fact that it's nobody's business but your own?  Why did the reporter feel the need to investigate the subject's background anyway?  The article was about an invention.  The inventor requested privacy.  And once he uncovered the information, why did he feel compelled to publish it?  If the inventor was a university professor and the digging uncovered the fact that he was raised as a satanist, would that be considered relevant?

So outing the subject....  Is it taboo, OK sometimes but not here, OK here, but mostly not, or always fair game?

For the record, I'm not convinced the story is directly related to the suicide.

---