Imagine a world from where the second you are born, you have a sample of DNA taken, and it gets entered into a national database to ensure a safer world. For some, the thought of having something so personal and unique to you in a national system is appalling, and for others, the thought of being able to find the perpetrator of a crime easily with the help of DNA is more important to them than having private information introduced into a database. Today, while not yet universal, DNA databases are used by multiple government departments. DNA is the material in all living things that carries genetic information. It is unique for every individual, with the exception of twins, and by reading DNA, it is possible to identify someone. Human DNA …show more content…
Some may claim that a universal DNA database invades privacy and basic rights, but the fear over any possible invasion of privacy is minor. In fact, former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani declared, "The opposition to DNA on the theory that this invades privacy- which comes mostly from the ACLU- is no more compelling than the opposition to fingerprinting when it first started,” (Marzilli 36).The objection to a universal DNA database is just like the objection to fingerprinting, which today is accepted in society and no one fears their privacy is invaded for fingerprinting.For those who oppose a universal DNA database because of the chance that they will be denied a job because of genetic history, do not have to worry. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), passed in 2008, prohibits any employer from denying an individual a job due to their genetic information. Everyone is allowed an equal chance at a job (EEOC). GINA protects everyone from experiencing discrimination in the workplace, and due to this act, people should not be opposed to a DNA database because they are protected from discrimination. Some also argue that the methods of obtaining DNA are invasive. Jim Wooley, an attorney, spoke to an audience of law enforcement officers that a method such as using a buccal swab, or using a cotton swab to rub against the inside of an individual’s cheek, may not initiate a search, explaining that, "Because it's so easy to get them, you don't have an
In the essay, “DNA fingerprinting: Cracking Our Genetic ‘Barcode’,” by Elaine Marieb, illustrates how significant DNA fingerprinting is today. She initiates a candid example of how New York City’s World Trade Center massacre killed more than 3, 000, left millions of bodies distorted, charred, and decayed. It was the staple for the ever-increasing need for DNA fingerprinting.
Human DNA is very similar to one another, but only about 0.1% is different from the next person. That 0.1% can tell a person’s eye color, hair color, and other physical features. DNA analyst are able to take a drop of blood, the size of a dime, and duplicate the number DNA found in that drop. With the ability to duplicate DNA, analysts can have a back-up, in the event a human error were to occur. Analyst can tell you exactly where your ancestors came from and the percentage that is still inside your DNA. DNA is a very powerful tool that can identify a murder if the individual left any blood, saliva, skin tissue, hair or semen. The education needed to be able make use of the DNA consists of a great deal of science classes.
DNA collection is a good thing not only can it help catch the person responsible for an illegal crime, but it can also clear up a suspect’s name. In the case of Maryland v. King on April 2009 Alonzo Jay King was charged for first and second degree assault for scarring a crowd of people with a shotgun, he was arrested and as a part of their booking procedure, they swabbed Alonzo Jay King for his DNA. Kings DNA sample later resulted to be a match of a DNA sample in the system “CODIS” of a rape victim by the name of Vonette W.’s Salisbury. Vonnette was raped on September 2003 but had not gotten justice for the crime against her since the only evidence was the DNA sample of the semen that was swabbed. No matches were found in the data base until Alonzo Jay King was arrested. By collecting DNA, it can help lead to an arrest of a suspect and to be able to close cases.
DNA testing is the most accurate way to identify an individual, and should therefore be used to increase the effectiveness of our justice system. This brings to light the issue of genetic privacy. Society questions the motives of government in DNA collection and floods the media, which acts as an informal actor on the court, with ideas of this invasion of privacy and encroachment of biological liberties. The 2010 article, Create a National DNA Database? stated that “such sensitive information is prone to misuse, and one should not have such blind faith in the security of government access to it.” EPIC, the electronic privacy
DNA is considered an individuals genetic fingerprint, thus it is exclusive to each and every individual. Since this exclusivity exists, DNA is a tool used for identification purposes. It has been utilized for investigations of serious crimes, identification of individuals killed in mass disasters, wars and paternity uncertainties1. Since the inception of the use of DNA in the 1980’s thousands of criminals have been caught and prosecuted with the help of DNA evidence2. Additionally, countless victims of mass disasters have been identified through DNA and returned to their loved ones. Although, there are various benefits to employing DNA it does not come without a sundry of ethical and legal concerns. The ethical concerns that have presented themselves are questions involving scientific reliability, DNA evidence in court, human rights, and finally the other uses of the DNA database.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a chemical structure containing a base sequence. Base pairs are genetic codes made up of four chemicals (Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine and Thymine) and each sequence differs in every person. Because DNA is so complex and varies immensely in individuals, it can be used like a fingerprint, hence the name DNA Fingerprinting. DNA can be found and analyzed in blood, semen, saliva, hair and skin--even decades old if properly stored. The process takes longer than simple fingerprinting and is very expensive, but the results are almost perfect in determining identity. While these tests are very accurate, there is a 1 in 50 billion chance that two people
Basically, our DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is our genes, and every person, except for twins, are born with a different DNA profile and that is in a giant database, containing every DNA profile of every person in the world. DNA testing started in 1985 by scientist Alec Jeffreys and was first used to solve a crime a year later. Before 1985 DNA evidence could not be used in court because it wasn’t invented yet, this increased the number of wrongful convictions which would have been prevented using DNA analysis. However, DNA analysis can still be used to solve crimes that occurred prior to the invention of DNA analysis, with a sufficient amount of DNA to be analyzed of course, which is a very small amount. Only a small amount of DNA is needed to find out who it belongs to, it can be found in blood, saliva, finger residue, hair, skin, semen and more.
DNA is certain characteristics that identifies a person by race, hair color, and their sex. Technology had changed the criminal justice tremendously and DNA is a prime example of how much technology has changed the aspect of the criminal justice system. When the DNA is used in an investigation it is used to help with identifying a suspect for committing a crime. The impact that DNA has had on the criminal justice system is that it has changed the way DNA is handled, collected, and the importance of DNA. DNA has revolutionized the criminal justice system in a major way because cold cases has been solved, people have cleared from murder cases, and it has been a vital source for information in criminal cases. The case of a Florida man by name
DNA testing was introduced late in the 20th century. Since then it has been debated whether or not law enforcement should be allowed to use DNA samples in their investigations. There are currently 21 states in America that have passed laws allowing law enforcement to collect DNA from an arrestee. In order to get a sample of DNA, many agencies swab the inside of the arrestee’s cheek. Samples are used to then chemically test the DNA for genetic markers and stored in the state’s database (Taking). The state of Michigan recently became the 21st state to pass legislation allowing these DNA samples to be taken at the time of any felony arrest; felonies are classified as the most serious of crimes. A person convicted
DNA is one of the most important pieces of evidence that a criminal justice agent can use in a court of law. There ae slim to no crimes committed that doesn’t have some type of DNA evidence left behind. Some DNA evidence could be, but not limited to, fingerprints, blood, hair, and any other bodily fluids. DNA is known as Deoxyribonucleic Acid, and is one of two types of molecules that encode genetic information (Medicine.net, 2017). DNA is characteristically unique to each person individually, unless they are a twin. DNA dictates a person’s look such as their eye color, blood type, height, hair color, skin color, etc. With this genetic information, intense testing can be done to find who may be connected to the genetic makeup of each stand
DNA forensics can also narrow down suspect pools, exonerate innocent suspects, and link crimes together if the same DNA is found at both scenes. However, without existing suspects, a DNA profile cannot direct an investigation because current knowledge of genotype-phenotype relation is too vague for DNA phenotyping. For example, a profile from a first time offender that has no match in any database may give the information that the criminal is a left handed male of medium stature with red hair and freckles. It would be impossible to interview every man who fits that description. However, with available suspects, DNA forensics has many advantages over other forms of evidence. One is the longevity of DNA. Although it will deteriorate if exposed to sunlight, it can remain intact for centuries under proper conditions (Sachs, 2004). Because DNA is so durable, investigators can reopen old cases to reexamine evidence.
How would you feel about a DNA database having record of every man, woman and child in the United States? Many questions are raised on whether it is ethical to have, safe and beneficial. A national DNA database could help solve crimes, but it also allows for thousands of innocent people to be at risk. Many argue against having a DNA database and many are for a database. I am going to argue against having a national DNA database because it has potential of being hacked, it is a violation of individual rights and DNA is not 100% accurate.
Due to the uniqueness of DNA it has become a powerful tool in criminal investigations
Maclin, T. (2005). Is obtaining an arrestee's DNA a valid special needs search under the fourth amendment? What should (and will) the Supreme Court do?. Journal Of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 33(1),
Privacy is also another big issue surrounding the plans for a database. Chairman of the New South Wales privacy council says that the prospect of a genetic database is a “cavalier disregard for people’s privacy”