Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.
Chapter
Chapter
very easy for sensitive medical information to be accessed and sold by unscrupulous individuals that had access to the DNA database. Not only that, but with the increasing use of DNA in medical situations, the absolute protection of results of analysis cannot be guaranteed against seizure by law enforcement agencies. An interesting aspect to refusing to give a sample voluntarily is that such refusal raises an air of suspicion. This in turn gives an aspect to proceedings in court which move from innocent until proved guilty towards guilty until exonerated by DNA. This is simply not how it should be. The more and more samples on the DNA database, the more likely it becomes that a chance match results in a wrongful conviction. As of early 2004, Canada and France have shown a greater degree of responsibility than the progressive belief of the Forensic Science Service that they can get away with any infringement of what is very personal information. What Canada and France have done is made it mandatory that samples from accused persons who are subsequently not charged or acquitted should not be retained. Even more sensible, if samples are taken from juveniles, even if convicted, they will be destroyed when the individual becomes a legal adult. As we in the UK seem to be marching towards institutional control of our most personal information, American law enforcement agencies are astonished that in the land of the free we seem to have no interest in a public debate of what might become not just control of information, but control of the individual. 2 Cloning as a legal issue
DOI link for very easy for sensitive medical information to be accessed and sold by unscrupulous individuals that had access to the DNA database. Not only that, but with the increasing use of DNA in medical situations, the absolute protection of results of analysis cannot be guaranteed against seizure by law enforcement agencies. An interesting aspect to refusing to give a sample voluntarily is that such refusal raises an air of suspicion. This in turn gives an aspect to proceedings in court which move from innocent until proved guilty towards guilty until exonerated by DNA. This is simply not how it should be. The more and more samples on the DNA database, the more likely it becomes that a chance match results in a wrongful conviction. As of early 2004, Canada and France have shown a greater degree of responsibility than the progressive belief of the Forensic Science Service that they can get away with any infringement of what is very personal information. What Canada and France have done is made it mandatory that samples from accused persons who are subsequently not charged or acquitted should not be retained. Even more sensible, if samples are taken from juveniles, even if convicted, they will be destroyed when the individual becomes a legal adult. As we in the UK seem to be marching towards institutional control of our most personal information, American law enforcement agencies are astonished that in the land of the free we seem to have no interest in a public debate of what might become not just control of information, but control of the individual. 2 Cloning as a legal issue
very easy for sensitive medical information to be accessed and sold by unscrupulous individuals that had access to the DNA database. Not only that, but with the increasing use of DNA in medical situations, the absolute protection of results of analysis cannot be guaranteed against seizure by law enforcement agencies. An interesting aspect to refusing to give a sample voluntarily is that such refusal raises an air of suspicion. This in turn gives an aspect to proceedings in court which move from innocent until proved guilty towards guilty until exonerated by DNA. This is simply not how it should be. The more and more samples on the DNA database, the more likely it becomes that a chance match results in a wrongful conviction. As of early 2004, Canada and France have shown a greater degree of responsibility than the progressive belief of the Forensic Science Service that they can get away with any infringement of what is very personal information. What Canada and France have done is made it mandatory that samples from accused persons who are subsequently not charged or acquitted should not be retained. Even more sensible, if samples are taken from juveniles, even if convicted, they will be destroyed when the individual becomes a legal adult. As we in the UK seem to be marching towards institutional control of our most personal information, American law enforcement agencies are astonished that in the land of the free we seem to have no interest in a public debate of what might become not just control of information, but control of the individual. 2 Cloning as a legal issue
ABSTRACT