|
May 8, 2008 - Large databases of consumer information present an irresistible target to hackers and identity thieves. And if the information in them contains inaccuracies or omissions, it can create a lot of problems. For instance, 79% of credit reports contain inaccuracies. In many cases, inaccurate credit reporting is caused because names and credit histories get confused. How many John Smith’s are their in the United States? It’s pretty easy to see how one John Smith’s data could be confused with another. Now, just imagine what could happen if the government established a DNA database! What could the information it contained be used for? What value would it hold for hackers? And what would happen if it contained inaccurate or incomplete data? We may be closer to finding out the answers to these questions than you may think.
Anyone who has ever tried to fix their credit report will tell you that it can be a daunting task. But if you think that’s bad, it will be nothing in comparison to fixing your DNA.
The federal government and the states all collect DNA samples from convicted criminals. But beginning in 2009, California will start collecting DNA samples from anyone arrested for a felony. And if they are not convicted, their DNA will still remain in the state’s computer database. Now the federal government wants to do the same thing.
There are some significant dangers to people when their data is stored in a DNA database. If you watch shows like Cold Case or CSI, you may think that DNA is basically foolproof. It may surprise you to learn that it is not. In fact, there is now a scientific controversy that is coming to a slow boil over the way that police use DNA in cold cases.
When scientists look at DNA, they don’t look at every one of the millions of genetic markers contained in a strand of DNA. Instead, they look only at 13 of them. If your DNA is found at a crime scene and all 13 of your genetic markers match the DNA found on a knife blade, it’s a pretty safe bet that the police will have found the right suspect when they arrest you.
But in some cases, and especially in cold cases, the DNA evidence is degraded. This means that scientists may only be able to look at 8 out of the 13 genetic markers they would normally review.
Now, take into account that it is very common for people to share some genetic markers. There is a very good chance that some of your friends have two or three genetic markers in common with you.
So with this information we take you, and your friends and load your DNA into a large database. Now let’s say that a crime is committed but the police are only able to collect degraded DNA. And let’s say that the criminal had some of the same markers you do, and that those markers were not degraded… You can see where we are headed here. In large databases, there is a chance for false positive reading for degraded DNA. In fact, there is a very good chance for false positives.
The FBI’s scientific review board has recommended that jury’s be given this information when deliberating. So far, the FBI itself has resisted the recommendation. Well, because it sounds much more impressive when a witness says that the chances of someone else having committed a crime are 1 in a billion rather than 1 in 3.
Crime is only one area where DNA databases may come back to haunt us all. How would insurance companies use this information if was made available to them? Is it possible to steal someone’s “DNA identity”? These are just a couple of the questions which have no answer right now.
There is a very good chance that this move to increase the size of the country’s DNA database is a precursor to having everyone’s DNA tested. If you think that’s far fetched, just consider this. Forty years ago, Social Security Cards had a warning printed on them that said they were not to be used for identification. And you didn’t need a Social Security Card to open a bank account.
The truth of the matter is that the Constitution guarantees the people that they are innocent until proven guilty by a jury of their peers. This proposal, if was to become law, actually turns the Constitutional principle of guilt on its head. And even if you are acquitted of the crime for which your DNA was tested in the first place, there is a very real chance that you may face other charges for crimes that you didn’t commit simply because you had some DNA markers in common with the actual criminal.
Note: When posting a comment, please sign-in first if you want a response. If you are not registered, click here. Registration is easy and free.
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. |
