Ethical and Legal Issues with DNA Profiling

It can be used in the real world to identify relationships between individuals by determining if two people are related. It could also be used to touch upon heritage from looking at back in generations. DNA fingerprints can also be used to identify a victim and help identify suspects in a crime scene. Lastly it can be used for personal identification. In some places, it requires you to give DNA fingerprints in order to identify a person.

Nowadays, DNA is a crucial component of a crime scene investigation, used to both to identify perpetrators from crime scenes and to determine a suspect’s guilt or innocence (Butler, 2005). The method of constructing a distinctive “fingerprint” from an individual’s DNA was first described by Alec Jeffreys in 1985. He discovered regions of repetitions of nucleotides inherent in DNA strands that differed from person to person (now known as variable number of tandem repeats, or VNTRs), and developed a technique to adjust the length variation into a definitive identity marker (Butler, 2005). Since then, DNA fingerprinting has been refined to be an indispensible source of evidence, expanded into multiple methods befitting different types of DNA

From cases such as OJ Simpson to Chandra Levy, DNA profiling also called DNA fingerprinting or DNA typing has played a major role in the criminal justice system. The law enforcement community uses DNA profiling to rule out or identify suspects. Unlike hair microscopy, bite mark comparisons, shoe print comparisons, and firearm tool mark analysis, DNA typing has been developed through massive scientific research and has undergone meticulous scientific evaluation (Innocence Project). DNA is a foolproof method of identifying a perpetrator of a crime.

When a crime has been committed, it is up to investigators and the courts to determine how to obtain a DNA sample from a suspect. Problems arise when an individual feels his or her Fourth Amendment rights have been violated when it comes to reasonableness of obtaining DNA, since many individuals feel they should be protected from unreasonable search of their person, home, and personal effects. There are several factors that need to be considered how to legally obtain DNA from a suspect. These can include warrant and probable cause issues, totality of circumstances, whether the crime in question is a violent felony, and if the suspect has been arrested, or previously arrested and convicted

forensic identification technique today1. It is the case of analyzing and profiling a DNA sample

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 testing is a critical and accurate tool in linking accused and even convicted criminals for crimes, and should be widely used to assess guilt or innocence before jail sentences are imposed. It was started up by scientists Francis C. Crick and James D, Watson in 1953 as they had described the uses, structures and purpose of the DNA “deoxyribonucleic acid” genetic fingerprint that contains organism information about an individual (testing

exception of identical twins, DNA fingerprinting is a reliable method used to determine the parents of a given baby. DNA fingerprints can be derived from restriction

Due to the uniqueness of DNA it has become a powerful tool in criminal investigations

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.

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).

DNA profiling technologies have had a considerable impact on how forensic science and criminal investigation have been understood, carried out, and regulated in the last 25 years. Current methods of forensic DNA profiling (known also as DNA fingerprinting and DNA typing), based on Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) amplifications of a varying number of Short Tandem Repeat (STR) loci found at different locations on the human genome, are regularly described as constituting the “gold standard for identification” in contemporary society. Prior to the implementation of PCR based extraction and amplification methods in the 1990’s, the initial uses of DNA fingerprinting (based on Multiple and Single Locus Probes) were largely confined to reactive

DNA Fingerprinting, also known as DNA Profiling, is a method used to identify a person using DNA patterns that are specific to him/her. 99.9% of DNA is identical in every human being, but .01% is enough to distinguish between people. It is most commonly used in criminal cases to link a criminal to his/her crime scene, but is also used for paternity/maternity tests, and immigration records. Usually a skin, hair, or body fluid sample is collected from a crime scene or criminal or test candidate, then DNA is extracted and cut using enzymes that recognize patterns in DNA and run through a gel by an electric current in a process called electrophoresis (Annely).

Law Enforcement keep notes on arrests that have founded people innocent of crimes, and retention of an innocent person's DNA can be charge or otherwise, seen as a invasion of that person’s privacy and civil liberties. Dr. Alec Jeffrey, a former professor at the University of Leicester laboratory, consulted with his lawyers to develop the new type of technique called DNA profiling. His technique would prove that DNA fingerprinting (profiling) can individualize evidence compared to the blood typing. DNA profiling compares 13 standard STRs to form a profile. The analysis used by the scientists, uses PCR and STRs to profile an individual. It is highly unlike that two individuals’ identical numbers of repeats for all 13 STRs, will match, which DNA fails is hardly never due to a successful match of 385 million to 1. This makes DNA profiling the most accurate tool in Forensics.

DNA fingerprinting is a technique that is used to determine how likely it is whether genetic material came from a specific person or family group. Since 99% of human DNA is identical, that means that it is only 1% of our DNA which is different, and it is that 1% that we look at when we are attempting to determine the origin of a DNA sample.