Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical issues of dna profiles
Morals and ethics of dna profiling
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethical issues of dna profiles
The question is should the United States of America require all of its citizens to submit DNA fingerprinting samples. Some citizens will say it is a good idea because it will make it easy to identify persons of interest. For example, the US Department of Defense maintains a database of over one million DNA samples for use in identifying the remains of armed forces members. (Johnson, 2004). Ethically DNA database usage could borderline invasion of privacy; examples of governments that tried to enforce such strict censuses on their citizens plague history and besmirch the concept of a DNA database at its core. Experts in the field of law argue over the use of genetic information as a means of surveillance with claims that DNA databases violate
It is also thought that DNA fingerprinting and databases lead to racial disparities within the criminal justice system, since the majority of incarcerated persons are of African American or Latino decent (Chow-White). The ethical argument is that while DNA sample collections are legal and undoubtedly helpful in obtaining convictions, it on the other hand supports and in some ways promote racial disparities (Chow- White). At the urging of multiple anti-watchdog groups, legislation for changes in polices and institutional practices must be implemented to address these disparities and protect individuals within these demographics. The suggestion of encrypted digital codes that limit the information revealed by these databases to individuals are also being evaluated
. DNA can be left or collected from the hair, saliva, blood, mucus, semen, urine, fecal matter, and even the bones. DNA analysis has been the most recent technique employed by the forensic science community to identify a suspect or victim since the use of fingerprinting. Moreover, since the introduction of this new technique it has been a large number of individuals released or convicted of crimes based on DNA left at the crime sceneDNA is the abbreviation for deoxyribonucleic acid. DNA is the genetic material found in cells of all living organisms. Human beings contain approximately one trillion cells (Aronson 9). DNA is a long strand in the shape of a double helix made up of small building blocks (Riley). There are four types of building
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.
One of society’s problems is that the wrong people are convicted of a crime they did not commit. None have more dire consequences on those than who are wrongly convicted of rape and murder. The punishment for these crimes are as harsh as possible to deter the crimes and when wrongly convicted, the wrong person gets punished while the true perpetrator gets away. In order to increase the chance of convicting the true perpetrator of the crime, the tools to find and convict criminals had to be refined. And it was refined due to extensive research into DNA. This research was done by Alec Jeffreys and Vicky Wilson, the research’s technician, and it found that in the massive amount of junk codes, there exists many repetitious codes that have copied so many times that it varies from person to person. (Ridley 132) This means that people can be identified with only their DNA from their hair, fluids, skin, etc. This discovery has led to convictions of rapists and murderers such as the Pickford case that Ridley wrote about. It has also led to the sentences of many wrongly convicted people to be retracted and this had led to the release of about 200 people known as the DNA 200. (Phelan) Now, most of the world keeps criminals’ genotype information in order to identify repeat offenders. In the United States, every state requires that every convicted
Before the late 1800’s, DNA was never used in court cases. We did not have the equipment readily available. Then, in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, DNA testing started to become very popular. This is when cases started getting overturned from wrongful court convictions. Which meant that the criminal that had actually committed the crime was on the loose in the community still able to do harm. In today’s generation, we still have many wrongful court convictions. Either due to their being little to no DNA evidence in the beginning of their case or the DNA evidence was tested incorrectly or possibly tampered with and that is what lead to the conviction of the wrong person. With the high level of technology we have today and the highly skilled experts in the labs we shouldn’t have any wrongful convictions. While we
Deoxyribonucleic acid also known as the term we all use today DNA, has increased the chances of catching criminal behavior brought out on a crime more efficiently and accurately then ways that were used before the 1980s.DNA not only was used in crimes but also used to figure out biological factors such as the relationship between parents, children and siblings. Although DNA testing could be more accurately obtained with a higher certainty level in crime then an eye witness or confession. Is it against the US Constitution to obtain samples from those who are already in custody? This question rests in the decision of our US Supreme Court whether or not it is against a person’s right to legally take their DNA without consent
In the world of forensic science, exoneration holds a very crucial role. In cases where a person has been convicted of a crime and needs to be proven innocent, exoneration plays a key part. It is what helps the court to decide in a just manner whether the crime was committed by that person or not. Exoneration is based on DNA evidence and therefore, is the most authentic. The main purpose of exoneration is to help the legal system by allowing innocent people to be discharged of guilty verdicts. Majority of the legal systems are built on such structures that the people responsible for crimes can be identified and penalized. Exoneration removes the burden, charge or responsibility which is being erroneously imposed on someone by the law. On one hand where it finds out about the actual convict, it also helps the innocent.
This paper explores deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) collection and its relationship to solving crimes. The collection of DNA is one of the most important steps in identifying a suspect in a crime. DNA evidence can either convict or exonerate an individual of a crime. Furthermore, the accuracy of forensic identification of evidence has the possibility of leaving biased effects on a juror (Carrell, Krauss, Liberman, Miethe, 2008). This paper examines Carrells et al’s research along with three other research articles to review how DNA is collected, the effects that is has on a juror and the pros and cons of DNA collection in the Forensic Science and Criminal Justice community.
The collection of DNA in an investigation is used most often to determine who the perpetrator(s) might be in a crime. There has been a rapid growth since its inception and legal and ethical issues have arisen. In the Double –Helix Double-Edged ...
To determine the balance between privacy and public safety legislation must address many questions including (but not limited to): when is a sample required to be obtained and by whom, is consent required, is force ever acceptable to obtain a sample, and which samples should be retained? Dr Katina Michael has reported that some instances that constitute acceptable DNA sample collection and storage (Table 4). The United States, England and Wales contain legislation that authorizes the collection of DNA from individuals arrested for violations of certain federal criminal laws and inclusion into the national DNA database of all profiles. Primary concerns focus these legal authorizations address privacy of a person and legal search and seizures of biological samples. For many countries like the United States there is a need to enact special legislation which led to delays in the implementation of DNA databases (Goodwin, et al., 2007, p102).
The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be addressed: When should genetic testing be used? And who should have access to the results of genetic tests? As I intend to show, genetic tests should only be used for treatable diseases, and individuals should have the freedom to decide who has access to their test results.
In today’s world, nothing is private; not even personal genetic information. Results from genetic testing can be accessed by employers and insurance companies. Until the Genetic Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) was passed in 2008, employers could deny people jobs and insurance companies could raise their rates solely based a person’s genetic makeup, even if someone is
Gene testing is the practice of testing individuals who show no symptoms to determine whether they carry genes that could cause them or their children to develop certain genetic diseases later in life. Gene screening is a very controversial topic because of the risks that come with it. Would you want to know if you’ll develop a life threatening disease later in life? Many individuals would want to know this, but some would not. Personally, I think gene testing is ethical under certain conditions.
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,
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.