Ethical Aspects Of DNA Profiling

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

For over a decade, there has been a controversial issue dealing with building a national DNA database. This issue has been brought up over the discussion of the actual database and what kinds of effects will come out of it, if it actually happens to go through. Some people think the database will be a force in crime fighting. Others think it is a violation of civil liberties.

Genetic profiling is a contemporary issue relating to the individual and technology which restricts access to unbiased decisions and privacy. Genetic profiling interferes with the individuals bodily, genetic and behavioural privacy, as it can be used for the benefit of identifying bodies to using the results of a DNA test to choose whether to employ one individual over another, due to future concerns. It can easily be argued that genetic profiling is in the need of law reform as a result of legal implications and the lack of individual’s rights.

DNA profiling involves testing mini-satellites one at a time which then goes on to produce an image which is much simpler than genetic fingerprinting. It provides a pattern which is unique to a particular person and is therefore suitable for forensic purposes. (Turnpenny, P et al 2005).

In current events, DNA fingerprinting is a vital instrument soldiers who are unidentifiable after war. Marieb wrote (435), “The U.S military takes blood and saliva samples from every recruit so it can identify soldiers killed in the line of duty.” In contrast, in the past, there were rudimentary ways to recognize

Perhaps the most critical improvement in criminal examination since the happening to one of a kind finger impression ID is the usage of DNA development to convict punks or get rid of persons as suspects. DNA examinations on spit, skin tissue, blood, hair, and semen can now be reliably used to association guilty parties to wrongdoings. Dynamically recognized in the midst of the past 10 years, DNA development is in the blink of an eye by and large used by police, prosecutors, shield course, and courts in the United

Have you ever taken into account the fact that all your genetic information could be stored on one database; that at any time you could be identified for every action in a matter of seconds with the click of a button? This notion has caused a large amount of controversy among the global population causing a heated debate regarding the ethicality of having DNA databases. With a large amount of technological advancement and the growing fears of citizens, these DNA databases have started to rise in hopes of benefiting the global population. Critics opposed to this development have pointed out many flaws regarding the idea and continue to promote the restriction of the growth of these types of databases. Through extensive research, the

If the government had every U.S. citizen’s DNA, and could in fact determine this information, I have no doubt it would be abused. This furthers my stance that a database like this should not be created or allowed.

According to Harmon (2007), “the public is unprepared for such information and that it is irresponsible to provide it without an expert to help put it in context” (p. 1). Unlike Harmon who actually had her DNA sequenced, I do not plan on obtaining a DNA profile. I understand that if will inform me that I may be prone to some genetic diseases, Alzheimer’s, prostrate cancer, Type 2 diabetes, along with Crohn’s disease. Harmon states “DNA is not definitive” (Harmon, 2007, p. 1).

These advancements in science are giving people amazing new perspectives on how to go about their medical lives, though all that information can potentially be harmful to citizens. How the government and other agencies, such as insurance companies, intervene and try to gain access to this information for its own personal benefits can affect whether or not people will use it. This technology, not being held under the FDA regulations, make it very scrutinized by the government in association with knowledge about possible mutations that could lead to diseases. Government agencies, such as the GAO or FTC, claim that these companies are “mislead[ing] consumers by making predictions that are medically unproven and so ambiguous that they do not provide meaningful information to consumers1.” The companies would argue that the purpose for the DNA sequencing is to give insight to possibilities that could affect the future health of its customers and would say that they aren’t giving a diagnosis of any diseases or cancers. Of course, the beneficial use of this technology to the government in fighting crime isn’t related to their stance on how non-meaningful their medical advice is.

Tyson describes several aspects of personal DNA testing. He discusses that insurance companies may see people’s genetic profiles and hold it against them (Tyson). This is scary because personal information

Genetic genealogy can set the stage for discrimination and inequality for those seeking minority status, for benefits and government handouts, or alternately, it can hold individuals back because of racism or bigotry; and lead to ‘genetically repackaged discrimination’. There is an uneven playing field, with some entities recognizing genetic testing results, yet others are rejecting it. While seeking personal identity is a worthwhile endeavor, another perspective brings a host of psychological, social, legal, political, and ethical worries. It is possible to uncover undesirable, or unexpected genetic ancestral ties that could lead to diverse identity issues, and other emotional, or financial consequences. Increasingly, genetic testing, or DNA, is used as a genealogical resource; it has potential to be used as a tool by narrowing down possibilities, but it can, also, be scientifically inaccurate. There are limitations in the science, both with interpretation of tests results, and with the databases. Avoiding inaccuracies requires sampling strategies and creating human population margins from genetic data. In addition, interpretation of ancestry tracing needs to be made less complicated for the consumer. While uncertainties are inherent, geneticists are optimistic about the future of genealogy using DNA.

There were approximately 300 genetic tests available that time. It is significant to note that the reference sequence of human genome was completed by Scientists in April 2003 (Hudson et al, 2008) and current genetic tests encompass over 1500 conditions. Barclay and Markell (2007) explained the ability to establish and document a person’s genetic composition is known as genetic mapping. It must be noted that genetic mapping was achieved through the Human Genome Project (HGP) as a collaborative international research program (Barclay & Markell, 1999). Genetic information was considered to be adequately different from other health related information thus the need for special legal protection (Ginsburg,

Deoxyribonucleic acid profiling also commonly known as DNA is a biotechnological science, a forensic technique used to identify individuals by using their genetic sequencing, although most people have the same DNA they have different regions within their sequencing that makes them individual. Profiling is not only used for fingerprinting it is used to analyse saliva, skin tissue, blood, hair and semen. The procedure of DNA profiling is used to identify criminals, disaster victims and one’s pedigrees through paternity tests.

Learning any kind of information about someone without his or her consent or knowledge is something to be ashamed of. Medical information is private and when someone tests another person’s DNA without him or her knowing it is violating that privacy. When people start to know more and more about everyone else we lose focus on what the truly important things about them are. We start noticing only the flaws about them and not all of the wonderful things, like their personality, or their hidden talents, all we see are the imperfections that cause us to dislike them. When the