In 2005, seven European countries signed the so-called Prüm Treaty to increase transnational collaboration in combating international crime, terrorism and illegal immigration. Three years later, the Treaty was adopted into EU law. EU member countries were now obliged to have systems in place to allow authorities of other member states access to nationally held data on DNA, fingerprints, and vehicles by August 2011. In this paper, we discuss the conditions of possibility for the Prüm network to emerge, and argue that (...) rather than a linear ascent towards technological and political convergence and harmonisation, the story of Prüm is heterogeneous and halting. This is reflected also in the early stages of implementing the Prüm Decision which has proven to be more challenging than it was hoped by the drivers of the Prüm process. In this sense, the Prüm network sits uncomfortably with success stories of forensic science . Instead of telling a story of heroic science, the story of Prüm articulates the European dream: one in which goods, services, and people live and travel freely and securely. (shrink)

In this brief report, the authors argue that while a lot of concerns about forensic DNA databases have been raised using arguments from biomedical ethics, these databases are used in a complete different context from other biomedical tools. Because they are used in the struggle against crime, the decision to create or store a genetic profile cannot be left to the individual. Instead, this decision is made by officials of a society. These decisions have to be based on a policy (...) that is the concretisation of some of society's most fundamental ideas about its own nature and function. Individuals wanting to influence these decisions have to try to influence this policy, within the bounds of a state's own self-concept. This article is an attempt to reorient the discussion about forensic DNA databases from a biomedical debate to a more political–philosophical one. (shrink)

This article examines the ethical, legal, and policy implications of using genetic information in preemployment criminal background checks, focusing on a case involving The University of Akron’s controversial policy requiring DNA samples from prospective employees. The article contextualizes this policy within the framework of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), which prohibits the use of genetic information in employment decisions. Key issues include the privacy concerns associated with collecting and retaining DNA, the potential for civil liberties infringements, and the risk (...) of discriminatory impacts on minority populations. The authors argue that while DNA technology is advancing in criminal and security contexts, the expansion of genetic screening in employment raises ethical dilemmas about privacy, fairness, and institutional security that challenge existing legal standards and call for clearer policies to balance employer interests with employee rights. (shrink)

Familial searching is a technology that detects genetic relatedness. The term is generally used to refer to searches conducted in criminal DNA databases to identify criminal suspects through their connection with relatives. Beyond criminal investigation purposes, familial searching might also be used for the identification of unknown bodies and missing persons. The United Kingdom and Poland are cases that illustrate the variability of familial searching meanings, uses, and regulations. In the United Kingdom, familial searching is regulated by exceptionality and is (...) mainly used for the identification of suspects in serious criminal cases. In Poland, familial searching is regulated within the framework of expanding the scope of its application to the search and/or identification of missing persons. Drawing on interviews with diverse key stakeholders in the United Kingdom and Poland, we address the ethical controversies of familial searching in the field of criminal investigation and in the domain of missing persons together. We argue that the views of stakeholders about the ethical controversies of familial searching lead to prescribing specific notions of social risks, public good, and the accountability of the state. (shrink)

There is scarce knowledge about the influence of the professional group, education, and age on public perspectives on the risks and benefits of forensic DNA databases. Based on data collected through an online questionnaire applied to 628 individuals in Portugal, this research fills that gap. More than three quarters of the respondents believed that the Portuguese forensic DNA database can help fight crime more efficiently and develop a swifter and more accurate justice, whereas only approximately half thought that it could (...) deter and prevent crime. Lack of security and control over access to data and the future unforeseen misuses of genetic information were the most relevant risks selected by the participants. Health care and life sciences professionals were more likely to agree with all the benefits, as opposed to those working in the field of law enforcement. More educated and older participants disagreed with benefits more often. Concerns with the risks increased with age. (shrink)

DNA evidence is one of the most significant modern advances in the search for truth since the cross examination, but its format as a random-match-probability makes it difficult for people to assign an appropriate probative value (Koehler, 2001). While Frequentist theories propose that the presentation of the match as a frequency rather than a probability facilitates more accurate assessment (e.g., Slovic et al., 2000), Exemplar-Cueing Theory predicts that the subjective weight assigned may be affected by the frequency or probability format, (...) and how easily examples of the event, i.e., ‘exemplars’, are generated from linguistic cues that frame the match in light of further evidence (Koehler & Macchi, 2004). This paper presents two juror research studies to examine the difficulties that jurors have in assigning appropriate probative value to DNA evidence when contradictory evidence is presented. Study 1 showed that refuting evidence significantly reduced guilt judgments when exemplars were linguistically cued, even when the probability match and the refuting evidence had the same objective probative value. Moreover, qualitative reason for judgment responses revealed that interpreting refuting evidence was found to be complex and not necessarily reductive; refutation was found indicative of innocence or guilt depending on whether exemplars have been cued or not. Study 2 showed that the introduction of judges’ directions to linguistically cue exemplars, did not increase the impact of refuting evidence beyond its objective probative value, but less guilty verdicts were returned when jurors were instructed to consider all possible explanations of the evidence. The results are discussed in light of contradictory frequentist and exemplar-cueing theoretical positions, and their real-world consequences. (shrink)