Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
an essay on the biological role of DNA
forensic science and the role it plays in solving crimes
role of forensic science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: an essay on the biological role of DNA
The structure of DNA was discovered in 1953 and revealed to the world by James Watson and Francis Crick.1 Since then, there has been a whirlwind of activity and discovery in the fields associated with DNA. We have found that DNA is not only a set of instructions for the body, but that it also contains a lot of information about the individual who “owns” the DNA. As it is rapidly becoming cheaper and easier to process DNA, it is becoming more difficult to make sure that there is adequate legislature to protect members of society.
Most genes are actually shared by all of humanity. In fact, 98% of human DNA is also shared with chimpanzees.2 However, some repeating units are unique and they can tell us much information about the individual the DNA came from. Many things can currently be determined from DNA. These include physical characteristics like gender, hair colour, and eye colour, and non-physical characteristics like the chance that individual has of developing, or passing on to children, diseases such as breast cancer, Huntington’s disease and cystic fibrosis.3 Technology has improved so much that eye colour group (light, dark or hazel) can be predicted with 97% accuracy.4
DNA profiling is a technique in which a sample of the unique part of DNA is taken, cut using restriction enzymes and separated by size using gel electrophoresis. Gel electrophoresis is where an electric current moves DNA strands through agarose gel towards the positive electrode. This makes a “DNA fingerprint”. (See Figure 1.) DNA profiling has a number of uses including paternity and kinship tests as well as in forensic science to solve crimes. In Victoria, the law allows the collection of DNA samples of convicted criminals and suspects. These DNA profil...
... middle of paper ...
...hat are unique to an individual. As technology is developing so fast, it is important that people in authority, for example judges and politicians, make sure that there are laws in place that protect the rights and safety of citizens in terms of how their DNA information is used and stored. They also need to make sure that they consider DNA as a piece of evidence that is usually very reliable but also has its limitations and exceptions and can never be 100 percent accurate. The general public can now get their DNA fingerprints made as a piece of artwork. As this is so easy and fairly inexpensive, people need to be aware of any implications this could have. For the most part, it would be harmless and an unusual item to own, however, people should make informed decisions when it comes to their personal details, including their DNA, now and even more so in the future.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is an acclaimed extraordinary discovery that has contributed great benefits in several fields throughout the world. DNA evidence is accounted for in the majority of cases presented in the criminal justice system. It is known as our very own unique genetic fingerprint; “a chromosome molecule which carries genetic coding unique to each person with the only exception of identical twins (that is why it is also called 'DNA fingerprinting ')” (Duhaime, n.d.). DNA is found in the nuclei of cells of nearly all living things.
DNA evidence should not be colvcslected from suspects as a matter of routine. To do so will cause unnecessary privacy intrusion; in the vast majority of criminal cases DNA evidence will contribute nothing to the investigation. Thus, it would not be appropriate for Parliament to give blanket authority to collect DNA samples from all persons suspected of indictable offences. DNA should also not be collected from a suspect if investigators have no DNA evidence with which to compare the suspect's sample. Nor would a DNA sample be necessary if the suspect admitted guilt.
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 samples. One of the more controversial practices of DNA forensics is familial DNA searching, which takes partial, rather than exact, matches between crime scene DNA and DNA stored in a public database as possible leads for further examination and information about the suspect. Using familial DNA searching for investigative purposes is a reliable and advantageous method to convict criminals.
DNA is the blueprint of life. It stores our genetic information which is what is in charge of how our physical appearance will look like. 99.9% of human DNA is the same in every person yet the remaining .1% is what distinguishes each person (Noble Prize). This small percentage is enough to make each person different and it makes identifying people a lot easier when its necessary. DNA not only serves to test relationships between people it also helps in criminal cases. DNA testing in criminal cases has not been around for many years if fact it was not until the early 1990s when the use of DNA testing for criminal cases was approved and made available. By comparing the DNA of a suspect and that found in the crime scene a person can either be convicted of a crime or they can be exonerated. This method of testing gained more publicity in the 1984 case of Kirk Noble Bloodsworth a man who had been convicted of the rape and first degree murder of a nine year old girl in Maryland. His case was a milestone in the criminal justice system since it involved the use of new technology and it also raised the question of how many people had been wrongly incarcerated for a crime they did not commit.
The more we know about genetics and the building blocks of life the closer we get to being capable of cloning a human. The study of chromosomes and DNA strains has been going on for years. In 1990, the Unites States Government founded the Human Genome Project (HGP). This program was to research and study the estimated 80,000 human genes and determine the sequences of 3 billion DNA molecules. Knowing and being able to examine each sequence could change how humans respond to diseases, viruses, and toxins common to everyday life. With the technology of today the HGP expects to have a blueprint of all human DNA sequences by the spring of 2000. This accomplishment, even though not cloning, presents other new issues for individuals and society. For this reason the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) was brought in to identify and address these issues. They operate to secure the individuals rights to those who contribute DNA samples for studies. The ELSI, being the biggest bioethics program, has to decide on important factors when an individual’s personal DNA is calculated. Such factors would include; who would have access to the information, who controls and protects the information and when to use it? Along with these concerns, the ESLI tries to prepare for the estimated impacts that genetic advances could be responsible for in the near future. The availability of such information is becoming to broad and one needs to be concerned where society is going with it.
DNA is a vital tool in forensic medicine, when it comes to tracking down that killer or finding that liar in the courtroom. However, DNA fingerprinting for example is also used to identify what a person did based off of their remains. “The U.S. military takes blood and saliva samples from every recruit so it can identify victims of mass disasters such as airplane crashes.” (Marieb, 2009, p.459). After the 9/11 attacks,
Gest, Ted. " DNA "Fingerprinting " is Facing a Major Legal Challenge from Defense Attorneys and Civil Libertarians."
In 1893, Francis Galton introduced a remarkable new way to identify people ("Fingerprinting" pg 1 par 3). His observation that each individual has a unique set of fingerprints revolutionized the world of forensics. Soon, all investigators had adapted the idea to use fingerprints as a form of identification. Unfortunately, over the course of the past century, criminals have adapted to this technique and seldom leave their incriminating marks at the crime scene. Forensics specialists were in need of a new way to identify criminals, and DNA provided the answer. When it comes to genetic material, it is virtually impossible for a criminal to leave a crime scene "clean." Whether it is a hair, flakes of skin, or a fragment of fingernail, if it contains genetic material then it has potential to incriminate. However, there are still concerns regarding DNA fingerprinting. What are the implications of using these tests in a courtroom scenario? What happens when DNA tests go awry? It is debatable whether or not DNA fingerprinting has a place in America's court systems.
Although the chemical structure in everyone’s DNA is the same. Only thing different is the order of DNA base pairs in each person. There are so many million base pairs in a person’s DNA which results in everyone having a different sequence. By using these sequences everybody could be identified solely by their base pairs, which does not give the exact “fingerprint” of the actual person. In result to, these...
Since DNA technology has been used there has been a high number of individuals convicted, linked or found innocent of a crimes. This technology has helped law enforcement catch suspects that may have never been found without the use of this technology. However, the research reflected that there is a need for clearer interpretations of the DNA results, better equality provided for all regardless of race or class and that errors should be reduced to prevent having cases that need to be exonerated.
The genetic technology revolution has proved to be both a blessing and a blight. The Human Genome Project is aimed at mapping and sequencing the entire human genome. DNA chips are loaded with information about human genes. The chip reveals specific information about the individuals’ health and genetic makeup (Richmond & Germov 2009).The technology has been described as a milestone by many in that it facilitates research, screening, and treatment of genetic conditions. However, there have been fears that the technology permits a reduction in privacy when the information is disclosed. Many argue that genetic information can also be used unfairly to discriminate against or stigmatize individuals (Willis 2009).
Since their first establishment in 1995 (Wallace, n.d.), the use of DNA databases has significantly increased. Today, DNA databases are rapidly expanding, with numerous countries using these databases for clinical research and to store criminal DNA (Roman-Santos, 2011). Their potential benefits and current assistance in solving crimes has caused huge controversy, especially surrounding the idea of a universal database. Although there are many benefits, including the identification and study of diseases, as well as improvements in crime detection and prevention, there are also various ethical concerns, such as the right to privacy and the potential for misuse if poorly regulated. These advantages and disadvantages instigate the debate as to
Before the 1980s, courts relied on testimony and eyewitness accounts as a main source of evidence. Notoriously unreliable, these techniques have since faded away to the stunning reliability of DNA forensics. In 1984, British geneticist Alec Jeffreys of the University of Leicester discovered an interesting new marker in the human genome. Most DNA information is the same in every human, but the junk code between genes is unique to every person. Junk DNA used for investigative purposes can be found in blood, saliva, perspiration, sexual fluid, skin tissue, bone marrow, dental pulp, and hair follicles (Butler, 2011). By analyzing this junk code, Jeffreys found certain sequences of 10 to 100 base pairs repeated multiple times. These tandem repeats are also the same for all people, but the number of repetitions is highly variable. Before this discovery, a drop of blood at a crime scene could only reveal a person’s blood type, plus a few proteins unique to certain people. Now DNA forensics can expose a person’s gender, race, susceptibility to diseases, and even propensity for high aggression or drug abuse (Butler, 2011). More importantly, the certainty of DNA evidence is extremely powerful in court. Astounded at this technology’s almost perfect accuracy, the FBI changed the name of its Serology Unit to the DNA Analysis Unit in 1988 when they began accepting requests for DNA comparisons (Using DNA to Solve Crimes, 2014).
Over 60 countries now have operating genetic databases that contain millions of people’s genetic information. There DNA is used for genetic studies and to identify genetic similarities in a family. This DNA can also be used to identify the perpetrator in a crime by comparing their DNA to the DNA found at the crime scene. But as gene banks have become more common around the world some have grown to question the sharing of this information internationally and the potential for hacking and abuse of the information.(yg, 2015) Gene banks have opened doors to many genetic discoveries, but they have constantly raised ethical questions pertaining to the privacy of one’s biological information and that the information could lead to potential discrimination.
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is a self-replicating molecule or material present in nearly all living organisms as the main constituent in chromosomes. It encodes the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms and many viruses. Simply put, DNA contains the instructions needed for an organism to develop, survive and reproduce. The discovery and use of DNA has seen many changes and made great progress over many years. James Watson was a pioneer molecular biologist who is credited, along with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins, with discovering the double helix structure of the DNA molecule. The three won the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1962 for their work (Bagley, 2013). Scientist use the term “double helix” to describe DNA’s winding, two-stranded chemical structure. This shape looks much like a twisted ladder and gives the DNA the power to pass along biological instructions with great precision.