Current Affairs Journal: Tenth Entry

ETHICAL ISSUE: DNA DATABASES

Imagine this scenario: Someone is killed in your home town and extensive research is done to find the perpetrator. There is no match found for the fingerprints or DNA collected at the crime scene and there is no possible suspect that could be charged, no DNA that could be used to compare the evidence to. The next thing that'll happen is something all of you can probably imagine: the case will became a “cold case”.

Now what if we (let’s speak about Austria ) had a DNA database that stores DNA samples from every single person living in this country. Of course, Austria does have a DNA databases but, according to the country’s regulations,  DNA samples are only taken from people that were convicted or are suspected to have committed a recordable offence. But what if a country was to decide to create a database that holds DNA fingerprints of every person living in that country? 

Let’s take a step back and look at DNA databases in general. Currently about 60 countries in the world have a DNA database and 34 more are currently in the process of establishing one. The regulations that state which people need to provide a sample differ from country to country. Like I already mentioned above, in Austria only people that are convicted offenders and suspects of serious offences are concerned. In the UK, though, samples are also collected from people that get arrested for any recordable offence. For that the database has grown to hold more than 329,660 crime scene DNA profiles and 5,093,145 individuals' profiles. In comparison, the Austrian database only holds 32,000 crime scene DNA profiles and 117,150 individuals' profiles. (Interpol survey report from 2008)

Now to get back on track: If we were to create a database that holds samples of every citizen of one country, we could compare any kind of genetic material found at a crime scene with the genetical fingerprint of every person living in this country. If we think about our imagined scenario again, wouldn’t this kind of database make it considerably easier to find our murderer?

Like always, though, there are some drawbacks and ethical issues to this idea. If it weren’t so, wouldn’t we already have an e.g. “Austrian DNA fingerprint database” and wouldn’t have to talk about it in theoretical terms?

The first drawback, a minor one I think, is the cost. If we really were to create this database, a great deal of money would have to be invested in both equipment and personnel. The money needed for analyzing (so the equipment that analyses) would be not such a huge problem, I think. Modern technology makes it less time-consuming and less expensive. But like I mentioned, equipment has to be bought and personnel has to be paid. So would it be worth it to get samples from every human being if the cost is that high? Or should you maybe just collect if from people living in areas with very high crime rates?

The second drawback is the violation of rights. As a human being living in our western society we have a couple of rights we might not be aware of. Such of these would be the right to privacy, t the right not to declare, the presumption of innocence, the right to health,.... If everybody were to provide samples for a database, some of these rights would be violated, which is why creating such a database would have to result in changes in the law as well. 

The following laws would make the situation difficult:
- The right of privacy: don’t think about privacy as being “ a space” but as being the choice of not wanting to share some information with somebody else. In a DNA databases you’d “share” your DNA with somebody. To identify someone, though, only certain markers in the DNA are needed. So if there was a regulation that says that only these markers are allowed to be stored, I guess we’d be fine. Some databases in Austria or the UK, though, store the DNA sample as a whole (not only the markers!). This would require the sample to be kept absolutely safe because it should not get in the hands of e.g. marketing companies. Although, if it would be used to conduct medical research for diseases (not cloning or anything like that!), I’d probably not mind. Progress in medicine wouldn’t be a bad side effect.
-The right to dignity:  That’s not really problem I think. Both personnel and conditions should be professional and only if that weren’t the case, it’d be a violation of this specific right.
-The right to physical integrity: Not really, otherwise you can probably not go to a doctor anymore. But if you think about donating other things like e.g. stem cells. Imagine these were to be stored and used to create tissue like new skin. Would you like your cells to be given to someone that got severe burns when he set a building on fire and consequently killed three people? Or is it not your right to “play god”? Just a little something to think about...
-The right to health: Again: samples taken by trained personnel. No harm should be done.
- The right not to declare and the presumption of innocence: Giving a sample wouldn't be a declaration of guilt.
- The right of freedom: This is probably the one right that creates the most problems. This right has two specific meanings: Firstly, it prevents someone to force someone else to do something. Secondly, it also gives you the right to “freedom of movement”. If you think about it, both of these rights would be violated if you had to provide a DNA sample.

Here are some other things I thought of while I was writing this post:
-How is e.g. the Austrian database supposed to find a perpetrator if he or she might not be Austrian? International collaboration would be necessary but would all countries agree on the same terms? How do we know the DNA samples are not used for other purposes?
- How about people that live in a country illegally? Which country is responsible for taking samples from them? And can we simply do that if they are no citizens of this country?
-Fear is also a very difficult issue: people know that also forensic scientists can make mistakes. Now that their DNA is stored on a database who knows when the first police officer will come and knock on their door?

I think that in general a complete DNA database of a country would have enormous advantages. If we set possible economic problems aside it'd be a quite good idea. But like I said, collaboration between more countries would make it even more useful. But will all countries collaborate? Will some insist on being allowed to use the DNA otherwise for research or e.g. cloning.And if it were to be really created, fear and paranoia would spread in the country. What if someone arrests us and we didn't do anything. Forensic sciences have their flaws as well, like anything else in this world.