The answer may seem to turn entirely on whether the resulting person would be you or I. Only I can be responsible for my actions. The fact that some person is me, by itself, gives me a reason to care about him. Each person has a special, selfish interest in her own future and no one else’s. Identity itself matters practically. But some say that I could have an entirely selfish reason to care about someone else’s well-being for his own sake. Perhaps what gives me a reason to care about what happens to the man people will call by my name tomorrow is not that he is me, but that he is then psychologically continuous with me as I am now (see Section 4), or because he relates to me in some other way that does not imply that we are the same person. If someone other than me were psychologically continuous tomorrow with me as I am now, he would have what matters to me, and I ought to transfer my selfish concern to him. Likewise, someone else could be responsible for my actions, and not for his own. Identity itself has no practical importance. (See Shoemaker 1970: 284; Parfit 1971, 1984: 215, 1995; Martin 1998.)
In other words, the deponent must respond unless the information is private, privileged or confidential. This remains true even if it is a tag team style deposition with multiple parties. Even then, the opposing side can request a privilege login order to see what is being withheld. Then the judge can decide in camera if there is a substantial likelihood that this evidence is helpful and a low burden of harming any privileges. For most lawyers, no matter how long they have practiced law, depositions are time consuming and accompanied by threats and a lot of stress. No matter what, the defense attorney needs to get answers to a few specific items no matter what.