Tuesday 1 December 2009

DNA Dilema


I think it's about time for another post.! The topic this time, DNA Databases.

There has been allot of debate recently over whether it is right to keep innocent, or rather arrested but non convicted, people's DNA on a database. There is the argument that it is and could be a very useful tool in making catching criminals more quick and efficient. The police and our glorious government (insert sarcastic tone there) maintain that it has reduced crime (since they have started keeping a database), they claim that it will protect the innocent from being wrongfully convicted and that the scientific evidence supports this. I believe they are talking nonsense. The statistics released by the home office do indeed show a reduction in crime but it is a 0.3% reduction. Not enough. Innocent people have indeed been in the past wrongfully convicted and cleared by DNA evidence, however you don't need a database to do this, you just need to compare DNA from the crime scene and DNA of the suspect. Their final argument holds no water either, only recently they displayed that they only listen to what suits their agenda when it comes to their scientific ad visors with the case of their ex-drugs advisor Prof Nutt. These are the strongest arguments that the home secretory came up with in an article he wrote, all in all pretty weak.

The scientist in me however (or a little part of the scientist in me) sees this as an ok idea. A database of any information has its usefulness in creating efficiency. Also, DNA is so specific to individuals (bar that of identical twins- though even their DNA has some small differences in it) that it is surely the perfect way of identifying someone? Yet there have been a few cases (albeit according to hearsay/and tabloids) where a 'suspect' identified by his DNA couldn't possibly or plausibly be the suspect. So as long as we were to continue using it in conjunction with other evidence it would be a good method of identification. On the other hand nothing, not even science (shocking as it seems) is flawless. Errors occur with contamination at different stages of the process (at the crime scene- the lab etc), or even silly things like mixed up labels etc.

Although scientifically I think it's a good way of identifying a suspect doesn't mean it is morally acceptable. The human rights court ruled last year that retaining DNA of innocent people 'constituted a disproportionate interference with the individuals right to respect for a private life and could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society'. The system they have of giving someones DNA profile a unique 20 digit code, for me, conjures up images of people being tattooed with numbered bar codes. Even if I was willing for them to know every tiny detail of my make up, I would never trust them with my data, if not because of worry of what they might do with it, then because of their record of loosing sensitive data which is abysmal. What if in 30 years time (and I'm going to go a bit sci-fi/paranoid on you now) there was a scientific advancement that allowed biological weapons to be DNA tagged. What if the government just lost another CD with sensitive data on it? What if this scientific advancement was made by some terrorist group? Or Perhaps another example- Who knows where the collection and usage would stop? Scientists (<3) could identify the gene that causes a violent personality, everyone with this gene now gets monitored in a prevention is better than freedom society.
Finally there is the argument that if you are innocent you won't get arrested. Yet evidence suggests, according to the human genetics commission, an increase of arrests to boost the DNA database was occurring. If we start collecting DNA of those arrested and not convicted what's to stop them turning around and saying, well we might as well get everybody's?I'm perhaps being a little over dramatic with my examples but I think in principle they stand. It would be a blatant invasion of privacy, we may as well have CCTV in every home.

The government should get rid of the databases they have, stop making up policies to suit themselves and listen to what the majority of people want. Spend the money on better police forces to find the criminals, who are more than likely not on the DNA database anyway!