I've been asked to post this on behalf of someone whose college class is discussing current legislation. She would like to know what the forensic community thinks about SB 1287: "Relating to the licensing and regulation of forensic analysts and the administration of the Texas Forensic Science Commission; authorizing fees; requiring an occupational license."
I told her I would make this post. Thank you in advance.
https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB1287/2015
Licensing Forensic Analysts
-
Tazman
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:25 am
Re: Licensing Forensic Analysts
As a dinosaur with crime scene and latent print experience spanning five decades, I am ambivalent.
We were talking about licensing in the 1970s when I got into the business. I have seen places hire a guy, send him to a two week school at DPS Academy, and proclaim him their expert. I have seen malfeasance and misfeasance by some of those two week wonders. I have also seen some brilliant people quickly establish respected careers who would have been frustrated by today's three or four year training programs, policies & procedures, and accreditation standards. I recognize the overall effect that licensing generally has on the level of professionalism in any field. I have heard the standard questions, such as "We license the barber who cuts your hair; why don't we license the fingerprint expert whose evidence can send a person to the death chamber?"
The broader lesson of the past five decades is that the legislature never does anything for the stated reason. There is always a hidden agenda. The usual effect of a law is the opposite of that intended and expressed by the law's title. So I'm cynical. Who got campaign contributions from what companies, and who will benefit financially when this law goes into effect? Private police and forensics academies? Law firms? Private consulting firms? "Follow the money."
Bottom line, I don't know what the effect of this law would be, nor do I think anyone can say for sure until it has been in force for awhile. But by then, if the result is not what people expected, it will be too late to go back. Once passed, laws are seldom rewritten or repealed.
I would say, get ready for licensing. I figure it's going to happen. But be careful -- it will not be what you expect.
We were talking about licensing in the 1970s when I got into the business. I have seen places hire a guy, send him to a two week school at DPS Academy, and proclaim him their expert. I have seen malfeasance and misfeasance by some of those two week wonders. I have also seen some brilliant people quickly establish respected careers who would have been frustrated by today's three or four year training programs, policies & procedures, and accreditation standards. I recognize the overall effect that licensing generally has on the level of professionalism in any field. I have heard the standard questions, such as "We license the barber who cuts your hair; why don't we license the fingerprint expert whose evidence can send a person to the death chamber?"
The broader lesson of the past five decades is that the legislature never does anything for the stated reason. There is always a hidden agenda. The usual effect of a law is the opposite of that intended and expressed by the law's title. So I'm cynical. Who got campaign contributions from what companies, and who will benefit financially when this law goes into effect? Private police and forensics academies? Law firms? Private consulting firms? "Follow the money."
Bottom line, I don't know what the effect of this law would be, nor do I think anyone can say for sure until it has been in force for awhile. But by then, if the result is not what people expected, it will be too late to go back. Once passed, laws are seldom rewritten or repealed.
I would say, get ready for licensing. I figure it's going to happen. But be careful -- it will not be what you expect.
"Man was born free, but he is everywhere in chains." -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau