Does DNA fingerprinting and modern genetic research encroach on the rights of the dead?
Introduction:
DNA fingerprinting and modern genetics are used to help historians, palaeontologists and archaeologists to research the evolution of mankind. The question that comes to mind is whether or not dead people have any rights when it comes to research.
What is DNA fingerprinting?
DNA fingerprinting is a way of getting a person’s identification. This is shown in Figure 3 on page 4. One can extract DNA from hair, nails, blood, skin or even saliva. It was first used to discover genetic diseases but now is also used to help catch criminals or research the dead in order to unlock the evolution of mankind.
Facts about DNA fingerprinting:
• Sir Alec Jeffrey discovered DNA fingerprinting on accident on September 10th 1984
• DNA fingerprinting doesn't have much to do with actual fingerprints, but it refers to the fingerprint of someone's DNA, which is unique to themself.
• It was made famous when prosecutors used it to accuse O.J. Simpson to a double murder.
• Some people, called chimeras, have different DNA in different cells.
• DNA fingerprinting can be used in paternity testing to find out who the father of a child is. Without this, fathers could leave their children, and not have to pay fees.
• Only one sample is needed for a person's DNA, unless they are chimeras.
• It is possible for the DNA to become contaminated.
• The chances of a mismatch happening was improved from one in fifty million to one in a billion.
Now it is used in maternity tests, personal identification and forensic science. DNA fingerprinting would allow a scientist or any qualified worker to match the DNA of any person. All the worker w...
... middle of paper ...
...nary, 8th edition. © 2009, Elsevier;http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/DNA+fingerprinting; 5/12/2014
• http://jdutchstevens.tripod.com/id5.html
• http://www.dnalc.org/resources/aboutdnafingerprinting.html
• Facts were found at https://sites.google.com/site/dnafingerptinting/tasks
• The Guinness Encyclopedia New Edition;1995;
Modern genetics:
• The Problems and Possibilities of Modern Genetics: A Paradigm for Social, Ethical, and Political Analysis; July 5, 2011; Eric Cohen and Robert P. George; http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2011/07/05-genetics-cohen-george; 5/12/2014
• wikipedia ;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics; 5/12/2014
• How is DNA profiling used in conservation and evolutionary studies;https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081111194824AANbIze
• http://knowgenetics.org/dtc-genetics-pros-and-cons/
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 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.
In the article, DNA Fingerprinting: Cracking Our Genetic “Barcode” by Elaine N. Marieb, she describes the process and uses of DNA fingerprinting. The importance of DNA is very helpful because it makes it easier to identify different individuals through their genetic material. In another interesting article, Interface Facts by Katie L. Burke, she mainly focuses on internet video games that could be an effective method for scientific research for scientists and non-scientists. DNA and Technology have emerged and are a great benefit to humans to help find matches such as long-relatives, a murderer in a case, and personal background information whether alive or deceased. Also DNA and Technology can be useful for public awareness reasons too.
Abstract; This paper explors the effects DNA fingerprinting has had on the trial courts and legal institutions. Judge Joseph Harris states that it is the "single greatest advance in the search for truth since the advent of the cross examination (Gest, 1988)." And I tend to agree with Judge Joseph's assertion, but with the invention and implementation of DNA profiling and technology has come numerous problems. This paper will explore: how DNA evidence was introduced into the trial courts, the effects of DNA evidence on the jury system and the future of DNA evidence in the trial courts.
DNA plays a significant role in criminal trials, firstly, because of its power to lead to the exoneration of innocent individuals. There are many instances in which wrongfully convicted individuals falsely confessed or made an incriminating
It was in 1984 when Alec Jeffreys, a British geneticist, discovered that specific sequences of DNA did not add to the function of a gene but were still constant throughout it. (Britannica). Jeffreys called these minisatellites and determined that each individual organism had a unique arrangement of minisatellites (Britannica). In the early uses of DNA fingerprinting, it was only used for identifying genetic diseases and disorders but people quickly realized that it could be used in many different areas of science (hubpages). Years after the discovery of DNA fingerprinting, it had been used to solve the first immigration case, the first paternity case, and even helped identify the first identical twins (le.ac.uk). The first methods of DNA fingerprinting were accurate, but you would have had needed to acquire a large amount of DNA. Over time, the advancement of science has led to major advances that formed the basis of DNA profiling techniques. These newer methods are still used today and allow scientist to use skin, blood, semen, and hair to gather DNA (le.ac.uk). In 1988 DNA fingerprinting was used for the first time in a criminal investigation. Timothy Spe...
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.
The history of fingerprint identification dates back all the way to the 200s BC. Ancient Chinese history shows details of using handprints as evidence in investigations of burglaries all the way back to 221-206 BC. Fingerprinting has been a major component in identification for crime scene investigations and law enforcement for centuries.
DNA in forensic science has been around for a long time. DNA has had help in solving almost every crime committed. There have been a lot of crimes where people are raped or murdered and the person who did it runs free. Scientists can collect the littlest item they see at the scene, such as a cigarette butt or coffee cup and check it for DNA. People have spent years in jail for a crime they didn’t commit till DNA testing came into effect. People are getting out of jail after 20 years for a crime they didn’t commit, cause of the DNA testing. DNA has helped medical researchers develop vaccines for disease causing microbe. DNA has become a standard tool of forensics in many murders and rapes.
Forensics has been greatly enhanced by technology. DNA profiling is one of the technologies that has influenced efficiency and credibility of forensic evidence. The FBI first started using DNA in one of its cases in 1988. In Europe, the United Kingdom opened a DNA database in 1955 (Milena, 2006). The main use of the DNA is to compare the evidence collected at crime scene with the suspects. In addition, it helps to establish a connection between the evidence and the criminals. The investigations have been simplified through the use of technology and DNA has been one of the most effective methods in investigations.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) has been used to analyze and prove innocence or guilt of suspects of crimes with great accuracy. DNA is part of everyday life. It is the heredity material in humans and almost all other organisms. While being part of an investigation. DNA has helped to solve crimes. There is a couple ways that DNA left behind can be tested to solve a crime. Either if the suspect has been caught and or had his or her DNA tested, or if he or she has left behind any biological evidence. Which then needs to be tested to see if it matches the DNA found in the crime scene to his or hers DNA. The result to this comparison may help establish if the suspect committed the crime.
Forensic genetics has other applications . The " fingerprint " DNA represents a valuable tool for forensic science . As is the case with an ordinary fingerprint genetic fingerprint is unique to each individual (except identical twins ) . The determination involves the observation of specific DNA sequences which can be obtained from extremely small tissue samples , hair, blood or eventually left at the scene . As Fifty microliters of blood, semen or five microliters of ten roots of hairs are enough , and nozzles secretions and cells from the fetus . In addition to its use in the capture of criminals , especially rapists , the genetic fingerprints can be used to establish family relationships . People involved in the conservation of species use them to be sure that captive breeding is among individuals who do not belong to the same family .
DNA profiles can be used to identify individuals, allowing evidence to be used both as a means of convicting the guilty and as a means of exonerating the innocent. People can leave traces of their DNA at a crime scene because it is inside every cell of their body. DNA can be extracted from blood, semen, saliva or hair roots left at a crime scene using a chemical process. Tiny amounts of DNA can be extracted from a single cell – such as cells shed from someone’s skin when they touch an object. Police can also collect biological samples from suspects, usually by scraping some cells from inside their cheek. If the DNA profile from an individual matches the DNA profile from a crime scene it is therefore highly likely that the blood, semen or saliva left at the crime scene came from them. Also, in a paternity test, the mother’s DNA profile is compared with the child’s to find which half was passed on by the mother. The other half of the child’s DNA is then compared with the alleged father’s DNA profile. If they don’t match, the ‘father’ is excluded, which means he isn’t the father of that child. If the DNA profiles match, the ‘father’ is not excluded - which means there is a high probability that he is the father. In both of these cases, the DNA profile is much like a “genetic fingerprint”, and if there are records kept such as birth certificates and social security numbers, then DNA profiles make just as much sense to keep.
Fingerprint usage dates back to the 1800s. Sir William Herschel used the prints as signatures on civil contracts, before they were found useful towards crimes (History of Fingerprints Timeline, 2012). A British surgeon, Dr. Henry Faulds, wrote about using fingerprints for personal identification. He first looked at prints on clay pottery and studied the ridges and patterns that they had made in the clay. In 1891, Juan Vucetich suggested to start fingerprinting criminals to keep the prints on record. The following year, Vucetich identified a print from a woman who killed her two sons. Investigators found her print and were able to correctly match her identity. Charles Darwin’s cousin, Sir Francis Galton, wrote and published the first book about fingerprints. He wrote about how every individual has a unique print by the certain traits of each fingerprint (History of Fingerprints, 2012). The popularity of fingerprints grew greatly in the United States in the early 1900s. Police departments and the FBI began to use the...
Forensic DNA analysis has helped us solve or come close to solve thousands of cases throughout the years we have had the opportunity to use it. For example, there was a