Monday, October 31, 2011

Specific Ethical Question

I am a biotechnology major, and I am planning on attending graduate school for forensic science/criminology.  The ethical question that I am focusing on is this: Should "familial searching" of DNA databases, such as the CODIS (combined DNA index system) of the US, be utilized in DNA profiling by law enforcement and our criminal justice system?


Background information
Familial searching of DNA databases is "the process whereby a DNA profile obtained from a crime scene fails to match an existing profile...and a decision is then made to search the [national DNA database] to see if there is instead a close match with the crime scene profile." [1]

Arguments for the affirmative
Familial searching of the DNA database:

  • Allows forensic analysts of law enforcement to identify suspects who are not in the DNA database. [1-3]
  • May decrease the need to use DNA dragnet techniques (collecting DNA from a large group of individuals to search for the perpetrator of a crime), which have had only limited success in helping to solve crimes in the US. [2]
  • Has the potential to increase greatly the number of criminal investigative leads produced by existing DNA databases. [4]
Arguments for the negative
Familial searching of the DNA database:

  • Violates the privacy of the person in the national database
  • Violates the privacy of possible relatives revealed by the search who would otherwise not be involved in police investigations
  • Reinforces views about the alleged prevalence of criminality within certain families
  • Reveals to relatives the presence of a family member in the national database
  • Reveals a previously unknown genetic link between individuals
  • Reveals an absence of a genetic link which individuals had thought existed [1]
  • Would disproportionately incorporate minorities into the database [4]
My position on the issue
I believe that familial searching of DNA databases should only be utilized if all other investigatory techniques have been exhausted. As stated above, familial searching can be very valuable in identifying possible suspects when the suspect him/herself is not already in the system. However, it is a major violation of privacy to be incriminating the relatives of the possible suspect, essentially, by using familial searching. 

References
(1) Haimes, Erica. "Social and Ethical Issues in the Use of Familial Searching in Forensic Investigations: Insights from Family and Kinship Studies." Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Summer (2006): 263-276. Print.
(2) Rothstein, Mark A. and Meghan K. Talbott. "The Expanding Use of DNA in Law Enforcement: What Role for Privacy?" Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Summer (2006): 153-164. Print.
(3) Greely, Henry T., Riordan, Daniel P., Garrison, Nanibaa' A., and Joanna L. Mountain. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Summer (2006): 248-262. Print.
(4) Lazer, David. "Searching the Family Tree for Suspects: Ethical and Implementation Issues in the Familial Searching of DNA Databases. Taubman Center Policy Briefs. March 2008. 

20 comments:

  1. 1. Strong
    2. Strong
    3. Strong
    4. Strong

    5. This is a really interesting topic. I have always wondered about it and I'm curious what would happen if the police took the wrong DNA and got it wrong. Then that person would be marked for doing nothing wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1. Described field of interest and described question posed. Strong
    2. Both sides of argument were presented. Strong
    3. Appropriate references were included Strong
    4. Defended position is described clearly Strong

    5. This is a very good argument. In your opinion maybe you should go into the benefits a little more, it would provide for a more convincing argument.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. S
    2. S
    3. S
    4. S

    5. Well written argument. I think that you could have added more in defending your argument. Possibly talk more about the benefits in your defense of the DNA database as a last resort.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S

    5.Excellent, all topics covered in a clear and concise manner with good sources. Maybe a little more detail on the affirmative argument would be helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S
    5.Very interesting topic and argument! IF all other techniques have been exhausted do you think that it’s ok that familial searching should then be used? Just some food for thought 

    ReplyDelete
  6. 1. S
    2. S
    3. S
    4. M

    5. I think you could have gone into a little more depth in describing why you have taken the position that you have on this issue. Maybe describe which arguments you don't agree with and why you have the position that you do.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.M

    5. like Matt said I think you need to take a stronger stance on how you feel. I know where you stand on the subject, but in your writing you make it feel like your on the fence.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S
    5. Great argument. I would suggest expanding your stance paragraph though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S

    5. Good job on providing all the necessary details to the issue at hand. One thing that could be done is expand why the point of view you chose is the right one.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S
    5. Interesting topic. The only suggestion I could give is being a little more detailed with your stance on the question. Good job.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S

    I found this a very interesting topic to Kang. Only suggestion I have is expand a bit more on you side of the argument.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 1. Described field of interest and described question posed. S
    2. Both sides of argument were presented. S
    3. Appropriate references were included S
    4. Defended position is described clearly S

    5. I think you described everything very well, I was just a little confused on which position you had. It just seemed like you gave the pros and cons of the one topic, not an opposing argument, to me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 1. S
    2. S
    3. S
    4. S

    5. Really thought provoking topic. Your argument is well developed, as is your opposing argument. Just from reading this, is this even legal? It seems like something that would be protected under the 4th amendment... but I could be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 1. S
    2. M
    3. S
    4. S
    5. Interesting Topic. Maybe could use a couple more points on the pros argument, if you can find some. Otherwise it is well written

    ReplyDelete
  15. 1.s
    2.s
    3.s
    4.s

    how effective has the familial database been in previous cases? is it accurate enough to spend money on keeping it up to date?

    ReplyDelete
  16. 1. Strong
    2. Strong
    3. Strong
    4. Strong

    I don't think its incriminating the family members of a criminal, after all, they are not going to be accused. But it is certainly violating their right to privacy.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 1. S
    2. S
    3. S
    4. S
    Very nice work! I agree with your argument that familial searching should only be used in special cases, there needs to be a system in place to gain approval for familial searching. But what would be the success rate for using the familial database?

    ReplyDelete
  18. 1.S
    2.S
    3.S
    4.S

    Very interesting topic, I think this sort of question will continue to arise as biotechnology advances.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 1. S
    2. S
    3. S
    4. S
    5. Nicely done. Only suggestion is to be a little more thorough on explaining your side.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 1. S
    2. S
    3. S
    4. S

    Nice work. I thought that both sides were thoroughly researched. I also felt that your opinion on the topic was welly informed

    ReplyDelete