Skip to main content
Log in

The Evolution of Forensic Genomics: Regulating Massively Parallel Sequencing

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Forensic genomics now enables law enforcement agencies to undertake rapid and detailed analysis of suspect samples using a technique known as massively parallel sequencing (MPS), including information such as physical traits, biological ancestry, and medical conditions. This article discusses the implications of MPS and provides ethical analysis, drawing on the concept of joint rights applicable to genomic data, and the concept of collective moral responsibility (understood as joint moral responsibility) that are applicable to law enforcement investigations that utilize genomic data. The widespread and unconstrained use of this technology without appropriate legal protections of individual moral rights and associated accountability mechanisms, could potentially not only involve violations of individual moral rights but also lead to an unacceptable shift in the balance of power between governments and the citizenry. We argue that in light of the rights of victims and the security benefits for society, there is a collective moral responsibility for individuals to submit their DNA to law enforcement and for MPS to be used where other, less invasive techniques are not effective. However, this application should be limited by legislation, including that any data obtained should be directly relevant to the investigation and should be destroyed at the conclusion of the investigation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. Nuclear DNA is inherited from all ancestors whereas mitochondrial DNA is only inherited from a single (maternal) lineage.

  2. For instance, the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) explicitly regulated DNA phenotyping in November 2019.

  3. On the other hand, there is the potential collateral damage to the relatives of criminals, given partially overlapping DNA profiles.

  4. This consent issue adds to other problems that can be raised in relation to direct-to-consumer genetic testing, such as the accuracy of the tests; and in cases where they relate to medical conditions, the fact that the results are not provided in a clinical setting by a healthcare professional to provide the individual with individualized advice on management.

References

  • Amorim, A., T. Fernandes, and N. Taveira, 2019. Mitochondrial DNA in human identification: A review. PeerJ: e7314.

  • Australian Federal Police (AFP). 2021. Advanced technology allows AFP to predict criminal profiles from DNA. https://www.afp.gov.au/news-media/media-releases/advanced-technology-allows-afp-predict-criminal-profiles-dna. Accessed May 9 2023.

  • Butler, J., and S. Willis. 2020. Interpol review of forensic biology and forensic DNA typing 2016-2019. Forensic Science International: Synergy 2: 352–367.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Claussnitzer, M., J. Cho, and R. Collins, et al. 2020. A brief history of human disease genetics. Nature 577: 179–189.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dias, R., and A. Torkamani. 2019. Artificial intelligence in clinical and genomic diagnostics. Genome Medicine 11: 1–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Innocence Project. 2023. DNA Exonerations in the United States. https://www.innocenceproject.org/dna-exonerations-in-the-united-states/. Accessed May 9 2023.

  • Kleinig, J., P. Mameli, S. Miller, D. Salane, and A. Schwartz. 2011. Security and privacy: Global standards for ethical identity management in contemporary liberal democratic states. Canberra: ANU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLean, C. 2014. Creating a wanted poster from a drop of blood: Using DNA phenotyping to generate an artist’s rendering of an offender based only on DNA shed at the crime scene. Hamline Law Review 36: 357–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. 1999. Collective rights. Public Affairs Quarterly 1(4): 331–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S.  2021a. Joint rights: Human beings, corporations and animals. Journal of Applied Ethics and Philosophy 12: 1–7.

  • Miller, S.  2021b. Predictive policing: The ethical issues. In Future morality, edited by D. Edmonds, 73–81. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S., and M. Smith. 2021. Ethics, public health and technology responses to COVID-19. Bioethics 35: 366–371.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S., and M. Smith. 2022. Quasi universal forensic DNA databases. Criminal Justice Ethics 41: 238–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. 1985. Personal identity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, C. 2015. Forensic genetic analysis of bio-geographical ancestry. Forensic Science International Genetics 18: 49–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, L., M. Mathieson, and T. Dwyer et al. 2021. Massively parallel sequencing as an investigative tool. Australian Journal of Forensic Science 53: 626–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, F., H. Machado, and S. Silva. 2013. Forensic DNA databases in European countries: Is size linked to performance? Life Sciences, Society and Policy 9: 9–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, P., B. Prainsack, and M. Kayser. 2019. The use of forensic DNA phenotyping in predicting appearance and biogeographic ancestry. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 116: 873–880.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scudder, N., D. McNevin, and S. Kelty, et al. 2019. Massively parallel sequencing and the emergence of forensic genomics: Defining the policy and legal issues for law enforcement. Science & Justice 58: 153–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M., and G. Urbas. 2012. Regulating new forms of forensic DNA profiling under Australian legislation: Familial matching and DNA phenotyping. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences 44: 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. 2016. DNA evidence in the Australian legal system. Sydney: LexisNexis.

  • Smith, M., M. Mann, and G. Urbas. 2018. Biometrics crime and security. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M., and R. Heath Jeffery. 2020. Addressing the challenges of artificial intelligence in medicine. Internal Medicine Journal 50: 1278–1281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M., and S. Miller. 2021. A principled approach to cross sector genomic data access. Bioethics 35: 779–786.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Tiihonen, J. 2015. Genetic background of extreme violent behaviour. Molecular Psychiatry 20: 786–792.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • United Kingdom National DNA Database Ethics Group (UKNDNAD). 2017. Ethical dimensions of the application of next generation sequencing technologies to criminal investigations.

  • Vassos, E., D. Collier, and S. Fazel. 2014. Systematic meta-analyses and field synopsis of genetic association studies of violence and aggression. Molecular Psychiatry 19: 471–477.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wickenheiser, R. 2019. Forensic genealogy, bioethics and the golden state killer case. Forensic Science International: Synergy 1: 114–125.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funds, grants, or other support was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Both authors contributed equally to this article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus Smith.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The author(s) declare no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, M., Miller, S. The Evolution of Forensic Genomics: Regulating Massively Parallel Sequencing. Bioethical Inquiry (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-023-10316-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-023-10316-w

Keywords

Navigation