CLPEX Chat Board

Bearing in mind the discussions on Brandon Mayfield and the Patriot Act, I thought you all might be interested in latest debates in the domain of bioethics in the UK. That is, the right to retain DNA and Fingerprints of innocent people on databases. I gave evidence to the investigating panel myself. In truth I agree with many of the findings, even if they may not be ideal from a fingerprint examiner perspective or law enforcement for that matter. I have always felt that I would not want my children on a criminal database for being in the wrong place at the wrong time and later exonorated, as can be the case for imprisonable offences at this time. Like I said, see the link below, you may not as forensic scientists like the conclusions, but as a human being it sure presses all the right buttons.

cheers

Dave


http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/go/our ... n_441.html

The ethical conundrum is how broad should be the database for DNA retention. Only convicted sex offenders? Convicted felons? Anyone convicted of a crime? Every citizen? What safeguards are needed to prevent misuse; for example, to determine the ethnicity of an unknown perpetrator? What safeguards are needed to prevent insurance companies from obtaining DNA information that might alert them to genetic conditions they do not want to cover?

The same might have been said of a fingerprint database a century ago and I often wonder what objections would be raised if fingerprint identification had only just recently been discovered now. Would not the same arguments be raised against the police retaining fingerprints and operating computer databases?

Philosophically, a line has to be drawn. That line is determined in each country by the degree of individual rights, privacy, and freedoms demanded in the culture. Different countries will have different restrictions put on their databases, and some will undoubtedly put no restrictions on the police right to obtain and computerize DNA.

This evolving debate is interesting to watch!

I just saw an article on CNN.com titled "Should Schools Fingerprint Our Children?" or something like that. It was about taking a single digit on a scanner to speed up the cafeteria line, (to pay for their lunches), and other places where children have to line up in school, like getting books passed out to the correct child. I have never seen so many Luddite comments about Big Brother and what horrible things "the government" would do with that vital biometric information. Clearly the people concerned don't have a clue about fingerprints.

Sharon,

I hear what you are saying and I respect what you say. However, I am a human being with rights first, and a forensic scientists second. What does concern me as a citizen of a democracy is the notion of law enforcement by consent. Once you introduce measures that remove that consent, as in compulsory ID cards or DNA recovery, pretty soon you lose law enforcement by consent and you enter a police state scenario. It may sound a little Luddite of me and I accept that. But one of the most horrific things I have witnessed over recent decades is the mission creep of the standards we apply to policing in general. There are real ethical issues about the storage of Bio samples. For instance, does the stae have the right to experiment with and study such samples? Under human rights articles prisoners have to consent to DNA samples being used for research purposes......are they asked appropriately for that consent?

As I said before, as a latent print examiner I welcome all the raw material I can get hold of to do my job. As a human being, do I really want to have access to so many bio identifyers of innocent people?

Food for thought??

In my part of the U.S., we routinely have school functions where local law enforcement is invited to fingerprint (or palm print for very small) children. The idea is that everyone should have a set of finger or palm prints available for identification in the case of a missing child, kidnapping or disaster recovery (storms, earthquakes, plane crashes, fires) in which a body can be quickly and easily identified. In our case, we send the controls home with the parents of the children and tell them to put them in a safe deposit box or safe in case they are needed. The information is available if needed, and the information is out of public hands.