The National DNA Database - Is It Worth the Risk?
In the past decade, genetic testing has become increasingly popular. Private companies, such as 23andMe have made genetic testing more accessible to the public, and allowed people to trace relatives and construct family trees and detect their susceptibility to disease. The improvement in DNA analysis technology and forensic DNA databases have also helped police to convict criminals charged with rape or homicide. However, it is not a good idea to have national DNA databases which would include all individuals - not just those who have been arrested or convicted for federal offenses or misdemeanors.
DNA provides information about an individual’s gender, ethnic appearance, and genetic relationships.
…show more content…
Forensic DNA databases contain DNA profiles of individuals who were involved in crimes, and this information can be shared used by international police forces. (“Is It Ethical”) In the United States, the 2008 Counter-Terrorism Act allowed security personnel to use a method known as Biosurveillance, tracking individuals by traces of DNA, to combat terrorism. However, national DNA databases contain millions of DNA profiles which increases the databases’ vulnerability to hacking. If these a national DNA database is hacked, terrorists and organized crime groups can use DNA profiles to hunt individuals and their relatives. Children, who have been separated from their parents for safety, could be tracked down by their parent using Biosurveillance. Additionally, individuals in witness protection programs will no longer be protected. These individuals can alter their identity, but they can still be traced by their …show more content…
The UK had one of the first national databases, but it did not increase the likelihood of prosecution, and it lowered the public’s trust and confidence in the police. From 2005-2006, only 0.37% of all recorded crimes were resolved using DNA detection (Levitt). Also, individuals do not need to have a DNA profile in a national DNA database to be exonerated from a crime. In the United States, The Innocence Project exonerated many innocent convicts, including some on death row, by taking their DNA sample to compare directly to the DNA sample found at the crime scene. Additionally, large numbers of DNA samples increases the likelihood of errors in the lab procedures or analysis. DNA profiles do not consist of a person’s entire DNA sequence. Instead, scientists use short tandem repeats (STRs), a sequence of 2-6 base pairs that repeats in the genome. Short tandem repeats are useful because they can be replicated using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification. Even though only a small part of the person’s DNA is included in the profile, it is unlikely to match another person’s profile. In the United Kingdom, ten STRs from different places in the genetic sequence are used to create a genetic profile, and the match probability is one-in-a-billion; however, a match is more likely to occur among relatives. It is difficult to
As we learned this week, DNA databases are used by various governmental agencies for several different purposes. We all have seen new magazine shows such as, 20/20 or Dateline, that show the collection of DNA samples from suspects in a case that is compared to those collected at the scene of the crime. But what happens when the sample is an incomplete match, compromised, or contaminated? The answer is the wrongful conviction of innocent citizens. The case that I have decided to highlight, is the wrongful conviction of Herman Atkins. In 1986, Atkins was convicted of two counts of forcible rape, two counts of oral copulation, and robbery in the state of California. It was alleged that Herman entered a shoe store, and raped, beat, and robbed a
The COmbined DNA Index System (CODIS) is a computer software program that is operated and maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, which allows law enforcement agencies to search and exchange DNA information. It was originally created in 1990 as a pilot software project that would allow 14 State and Local laboratories to communicate and share biological evidence data to aid in criminal case closure. Following the DNA Identification Act of 1994, the FBI established the National DNA Index System (NDIS) that currently serves over 25 countries in their own DNA Data banking initiatives (Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2010). NDIS, populated by many State DNA Index Systems (SDIS) and local DNA Index Systems (LDIS) provide a mechanism for cross checking previously disparate legal and judicial entities for serial criminal offenders (USA.gov, 2010).
“DNA Testing and the Death Penalty.” ACLU: American Civil Liberties Union. 3 Oct. 2011. Web. 22 April 2014.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is an acclaimed extraordinary discovery that has contributed great benefits in several fields throughout the world. DNA evidence is accounted for in the majority of cases presented in the criminal justice system. It is known as our very own unique genetic fingerprint; “a chromosome molecule which carries genetic coding unique to each person with the only exception of identical twins (that is why it is also called 'DNA fingerprinting ')” (Duhaime, n.d.). DNA is found in the nuclei of cells of nearly all living things.
accept DNA profiles from. As estimated by the FBI, the chances of two DNA samples
The genetic technology revolution has proved to be both a blessing and a blight. The Human Genome Project is aimed at mapping and sequencing the entire human genome. DNA chips are loaded with information about human genes. The chip reveals specific information about the individuals’ health and genetic makeup (Richmond & Germov 2009).The technology has been described as a milestone by many in that it facilitates research, screening, and treatment of genetic conditions. However, there have been fears that the technology permits a reduction in privacy when the information is disclosed. Many argue that genetic information can also be used unfairly to discriminate against or stigmatize individuals (Willis 2009).
The collection of DNA in an investigation is used most often to determine who the perpetrator(s) might be in a crime. There has been a rapid growth since its inception and legal and ethical issues have arisen. In the Double –Helix Double-Edged ...
There are thirteen standard tandem repeats used in modern forensics, and together these sequences create a DNA profile. Except in the case of identical twins, the probability that two people have the same genetic code at all thirteen core loci is less than one in one trillion (Jones, 2004). Investigators compare these...
The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be addressed: When should genetic testing be used? And who should have access to the results of genetic tests? As I intend to show, genetic tests should only be used for treatable diseases, and individuals should have the freedom to decide who has access to their test results.
“The rapid implementation and continuing expansion of forensic DNA databases around the world has been supported by claims about their effectiveness in criminal investigations and challenged by assertions of the resulting intrusiveness into individual privacy” (p545).
For example, if a person was given a life sentence, they would be able to be released, if found innocent. If they were given the death penalty, although it takes years, odds are they will be dead before they could be found innocent. The Innocence Project was established in order to vindicate individuals who were wrongfully convicted due to DNA calamity or misidentification with witnesses. Since the Innocent project has been established, an uncountable number of individuals have received freedom for crimes they were wrongfully accused of committing. For most individuals who received a life sentence, and not the death penalty, they were granted a release. According to the Innocence Project out of 300 people exonerated, 25% were convicted of murder, and 18 had death sentences. The innocence project also states, “We have also worked on cases of people who were executed before DNA testing could be conducted to corroborate guilt or prove innocence, and we are aware of several non-DNA cases where evidence of innocence surfaced after people were executed”(Innocenceproject.org/aboutpage). Disparate from the individuals facing a life sentence, those that received a death sentence are less likely to survive to prove their
"The Innocence Projectan." The Innocence Project - About Us: FAQs:How Many People Have Been Exonerated through DNA Testing? Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Singer, Julie A. "The Impact Of Dna And Other Technology On The Criminal Justice System: Improvements And Complications."Albany Law Journal Of Science & Technology 17.(2007): 87. LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
Genetic testing, also known as screening, is a rapidly advancing new scientific field that can potentially revolutionize not only the world of medicine, but many aspects of our lives. Genetic screening is the sequencing of human DNA in order to discover genetic differences, anomalies, or mutations that may prove pathological. As genetic screening becomes more advanced and easily accessible, it presents society with difficult questions that must be asked about the boundaries of science and to what degree we are allowed to tamper with the human genome. To better understand the potential impact of genetic screening on our society, we must examine the potential benefits in comparison to the possible negative impact it may cause. With this knowledge in hand, we can examine what the future holds for this field of study and the best possible direction to take.
Chief: Earlier you mentioned that it would be beneficial in the workplace. However it can also be disadvantageous. People worry that corporations will use this knowledge to discriminate against their workers. They may worry that they will consider these results of genetic tests when they are applying.