Ethical Dilemmas in Forensic DNA Phenotyping: Predicting Physical Traits from Genetic Data

 

By: Prajwal Biswas

M. Sc. in Forensic Science, National Forensic Sciences University

Volunteer of C. A. S. E. 23.

Introduction:

FDP (Forensic DNA Phenotyping) is an emerging technology that relies on genetic information to predict physical properties ranging from skin color and hair color to eye color and even the structure of the facial form. It supports criminal investigations, where it allows researchers to produce a visual profile of an unknown suspect based solely on DNA samples. At the same time as it promises to crack especially those most difficult cases, especially cold cases, this technology raises a number of ethical dilemmas that must be solved in order to balance public safety with individual privacy.

          Figure 1 Forensic DNA Phenotyping

Privacy Matters:

One of the most fundamental ethical issues has to do with privacy. Even though FDP screens for genes that determine physical characteristics, DNA contains a lot more sensitive information concerning predispositions to diseases or family relationships. The collection of such information without consent raises concerns over the amplitude of genetic information. Law enforcement should gain access to and how such data may be mishandled or exposed in non-forensic field.

. Figure 2 Ethical concerns regarding FDP

Racial Profiling:

Another concern is racial profiling. FDP can be seen as a reifying technology tool that identifies stereotypes, especially when genetic markers that are associated with ethnicity or race are disproportionately applied in the profiling process. Applied predicted traits such as color and facial features may assist the perpetuation of biased policing practices targeting racial or ethnic groups, a practice that would further exacerbate societal inequalities.

Consent and Informed Use:

Unlike classical DNA banks that involve the intentional taking of individuals' genetic data with consent, FDP involves DNA taken directly from the crime scene without any subject's consent. Suspects or unknown subjects have no control over their genetic data and its usage. This creates a morality gray area as genetic data is extremely personal, containing far more information than is necessary for the enforcement of law.

Accuracy and Misidentification:

The current FDP is still not accurate. DNA prediction for most physical characteristics has just begun to develop, and some are more reliable than others. Potential misidentifications due to the inaccuracy or incompleteness of predictions may raise wrongful suspicion or arrest of people and concerns over the issue of fairness in criminal justice. So more research and new technologies has to be surfaced in reality.

Conclusion:

While this technique promises to greatly aid in solving crimes and serving justice, on the other hand, it raises a myriad of ethical controversies that need careful deliberation. The balance needed is between huge crime-solving benefits and potential invasion of privacy, racial biases, lack of consent, or the risk of being mis-identified. Suitable regulation and institutional oversight may be able to help reduce most of these problems by responsible and ethical use of FDP in the process of criminal investigations.

Reference:

1. Aurora Canales Serrano, Forensic DNA phenotyping: A promising tool to aid forensic investigation, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.remle.2020.01.002.

2. Erin Murphy, Legal and Ethical Issues in Forensic DNA Phenotyping, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2288204

3. Manfred Kayser, Forensic DNA Phenotyping: Predicting human appearance from crime scene material for investigative purposes, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.02.003.

4. Pośpiech, E.; Teisseyre, P.; Mielniczuk, J.; Branicki, W. Predicting Physical Appearance from DNA Data—Towards Genomic Solutions. Genes 2022, 13, 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes13010121