The Double Helix Possesses All: Privacy Issues in the US

Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/business/25stream.html?_r=1. Steinhauer J. “Grim Sleeper” Arrest Fans Debate on DNA Use. The New York Times [Internet]. 2010 [cited 21 May 2012]; N page.

Marshall, Elizabeth L. The Human Genome Project: Cracking the Code within Us. New York: F. Watts, 1996. Print. "Powering a Cure; Genetic Medicine." The Economist 27 Oct. 2012: 14(US).

Mass Media | Beyond Intractability. Retrieved April 25, 2014, from http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/mass-communication Preston, B. (2012, October 2). A Guide to the Obama Administration’s Five Major Scandals for Mainstream Media Dummies. The PJ Tatler RSS.

Jacksona, J. Gruberb, A.D. Thibedeaub. Forensic DNA databases–Ethical and legal standards, ScienceDirec, 2014. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090536X14000239 Westphal, Sylvia Pagán. DNA profiles link dope to its source. Daily News, 2003 https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3919-dna-profiles-link-dope-to-its-source/

Callier, Shawneequa L., John Huss, and Eric T. Juengst. "GINA and preemployment criminal background checks." The Hastings Center Report Jan.-Feb. 2010: 15+.Science in Context. Web. 21 May 2014.

Obviously part of the DNA evidence tested should be preserved for further testing, but in some cases, that isn’t always possible. In this case, the American Bar Association requests that the laboratory not perform a test that could consume all evidence without permission from the prosecution (or defense, depending which side the lab was hired by); but before giving approval, the prosecution should provide the defendant a chance to object or move for a court order and vice versa (ABA, 2007). Some prosecutors, however, feel the only reason to alert the defense of possible consumption of evidence is out of common ... ... middle of paper ... ...r the Wrongly Convicted: Judicial Sanction for Destruction of DNA Evidence." Fordham's Law Review 77.6 (2009): 2918-925. 2009.

Digital privacy concerns, which have been a major issue in our country since 2001, increasingly violate our basic human rights as global citizens. The growing amount of government surveillance has manifested in the enactment of acts such as SOPA and CISPA. Although their intent on stopping digital piracy and attacks were clear, both were immediately met with harsh criticism; they allowed big corporations to violate our privacy rights by sharing our personal information with both other companies and the government. Our President, although publicly expressing his acknowledgement of the issue, failed to discuss an array of other pressing dilemmas regulated by the recently exposed National Security Agency (NSA), especially those involving the mass data stockpiles and the rights of foreigners against immoderate and disproportionate surveillance by the US. Furthermore, the intentions of the NSA still remain unclear; why is the collection and the extended retention of this data useful?

Stem Cell Research is Illegal, Immoral and Unnecessary President Bush's limited federal funding of research relying on the destruction of human embryos violates federal statutory law. Christians have grieved for many years over the assault on unborn human life set loose upon our nation by the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. Even that decision, however, did not affect all areas of law where lawmakers seek to protect developing human life. Because they are not covered by the Court's theory of reproductive privacy, human embryos outside the womb may be fully protected by law - and at least nine states have acted to protect these embryos from lethal experiments. In some states, destructive experimentation on human embryos is a felony.

Genetic screening found its way into corporate boardrooms and insurance companies, creating large amounts of discrimination against employees where genetic make-up revealed a disposition to certain diseases. Despite acts prohibiting genetic discrimination, such as the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA), insurance companies today still use results from genetic screening tests to deny people medical coverage that they need (Hill). Insurance companies should not be permitted to use genetic screening in their application process as it creates discrimination against the individual as well as entire races, and the information is not reliable. Genetic screening is a process created in the 1990s, which allowed anyone to have his or her genome mapped out and carefully studied for signs of hereditary diseases and cancer. Typically, it is used to detect only recessive or heterozygote diseases such as Tay Sachs Disease and Cystic Fibrosis, and today is applied to predisposition testing for multifactorial diseases of larger populations (Chadwick, 1).

(2014, February 7). Regulation of Genetic Tests. Retrieved April 24, 2014, from http://www.genome.gov/10002335 Types of Genetic Testing | Medindia. (n.d.). Medindia.