'DNA Fingerprinting' Trend Threatens Genetic Privacy, Due Process

[acmavm]

http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=a82d75a5846357315237f8c49625dec6

(NOTE FROM ME - a few days old but interesting and frightening.)

News Analysis, Marcelo Ballve,
Pacific News Service, Jul 13, 2004

Editor's Note: Nationwide, collection of DNA samples by law enforcement is expanding, from collecting the DNA of convicted felons, which most states already require, to taking DNA samples of arrestees. Californians will vote on a "DNA fingerprinting" initiative this November. Civil libertarians say privacy and the presumption of innocence are in jeopardy.

<snip>

SAN FRANCISCO--Genetics and crime fighting are becoming as intertwined as the DNA double helix. But that quickly evolving collaboration has taken a dangerous new twist.

Three states -- Virginia, Louisiana and Texas -- already require the collection of DNA samples from arrestees as part of the booking process, even before suspects go on trial. Critics see a worrying erosion of due process and what they call "DNA privacy" -- the right of citizens to keep genetic information private.

Nationwide, "DNA data-banking" policies vary, but over 30 states already require DNA collection from felons. California requires DNA sampling only from those convicted for violent felonies and some sex crimes.

But some want to go further, and take DNA samples from arrestees. Prop. 69, the "DNA Fingerprint" initiative, will be on November's ballot and already enjoys broad bipartisan support. If voters pass it, California -- a bellwether state for criminal justice trends -- will have among the country's most sweeping DNA sampling policies.
-MORE-

So, all you have to do is be arrested now?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Next step: DNA sampling needed to get drivers' licenses N/T

[LibLabUK]

2. Hmm

Are they banking/archiving samples or the DNA fingerprints?

IF it's the fingerprints only there's no issue with 'genetic privacy', if it's the samples there might be...

But banking/archiving samples creates a herculean task for oneself when it comes to trying to search the archive for matches.

[Liberal Classic]

4. Good questions

Sometimes it is hard to tell because science reporting doesn't use precise language. Just because the name of the law imples a DNA profile or fingerprint doesn't mean that is what the law will do. Without seeing the actual proposed law I can't say with certainty that it gives the government the authority to store samples, or only the results from a DNA profiling test. From reading the article, it sounds to me that they're talking about keeping samples. Proponents of the law naturally dismissed criticism as being alarmism, saying that what they're doing is nothing different than taking tradititional fingerprints. However, I did not gather from reading the article that what is "banked" is the result of a test, but the mouth swab. To me this imples DNA sampling and long-term storage of samples, not merely filing the results of a DNA profiling test.

Another good question you pose is about the actual procedures used to run the DNA bank. I am not sure how long samples in the DNA bank would last, considering that using today's technology some amount of sample must be destroyed during processing. However, as the technology improves, this amount becomes less and less. I do not know myself if a mouth swab is enough sample for repeated uses, but perhaps it is. I also wonder how such a DNA bank would be searched. For today, I doubt it wouldn't be approached from a brute force angle. Samples would likely be cataloged by things like race and sex, to be called up when there is enough evidence to narrow the range of subjects. When until the technological tools used by biology informatics people has advanced sufficiently to run a computerized search, I imagine brute force searches will come into their own.

Cheers

[Jack_DeLeon]

3. I'm totally against this shit....

I dont want to live in a "GATTACA" type world.

[gatlingforme]

5. Not only do I disagree with this, I wonder how much it would cost

for this as well? just to do a finderprint search from feds is $50.00/ AND what type of informantion will be stored with the DNA samples of all the people. i.e. political affiliation, financial status, how many children they have are they gay.... etc...Then all one has to do is get a good hair sample and get the entire life history of that person. abuse of this will come shortly.

[gatlingforme]

6. It's too bad this post is not getting the attention it deserves

[MrSandman]

7. Recently there was a program nearby...

Where the Sheriff was DNA sampling all the Kndergarten students for their safety. Go to the neo natal ward next.

[gatlingforme]

8. I wonder what the parents said to that.

[MrSandman]

9. It was a couple of counties over...

The local TV news presented as such a public service the SD was willing to do. I know that I would have been rather incensed if it were done here w/o permission.