| | |
|
AdamCohen2ndPaper 3 - 17 Dec 2008 - Main.KateVershov
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
Nothing Left to Hide: The Danger of DNA Databases | | | The probable cause requirements to be arrested is not, however, the threshold that is needed for the government to collect and catalogue your DNA. The Washington Supreme Court upheld a conviction based on a DNA sample lifted from an envelope that was fraudulently obtained by police officers posing as a fake law firm . Perhaps more frightening, and mirroring our in-class conversations that with enough outside information things can be inferred about you, the LAPD wants to begin to search DNA databases with new software that targets familial matches. If you want to stay off the DNA grid, you’ll need to take your whole family with you. | |
<
< | However, maybe the largest specter in the collection of everyone’s DNA isn’t Big Brother, but is really ourselves. In a society where people happily post their entire lives on social networking sites, conduct and store their online correspondence with Google as well as manage their finances online with Quicken , it shouldn’t be surprising that people are happy to send away their DNA information for pop science, or at least currently undeveloped science. With the increased technological ease of DNA collection , a whole market has grown up around direct consumer DNA tests. Whether it’s testing one’s geographic ancestry , how closely related someone is a famous historical figure , paternity tests , or predictive health problems , there are dozens of pseudo-science tests that result in people voluntarily offering up their DNA. Just as our consumer spending information and personal information is sold back and forth among companies once we put it into the open, one must wonder the fate of this genetic information. It’s doubtful that people are much more protective of their DNA than they are their credit card number or that they spend much time reading the contractual terms outlining the fate of their DNA submissions. | >
> | However, maybe the largest specter in the collection of everyone’s DNA isn’t Big Brother, but is really ourselves. In a society where people happily post their entire lives on social networking sites, conduct and store their online correspondence with Google as well as manage their finances online with Quicken , it shouldn’t be surprising that people are happy to send away their DNA information for pop science, or at least currently undeveloped science. With the increased technological ease of DNA collection , a whole market has grown up around direct consumer DNA tests. Whether it’s testing one’s geographic ancestry, how closely related someone is to a famous historical figure, paternity tests, or predictive health problems , there are dozens of pseudo-science tests that result in people voluntarily offering up their DNA. Just as our consumer spending information and personal information is sold back and forth among companies once we put it into the open, one must wonder the fate of this genetic information. It’s doubtful that people are much more protective of their DNA than they are their credit card number or that they spend much time reading the contractual terms outlining the fate of their DNA submissions. | | | However, even if you think that it’s a person’s own prerogative to give away their DNA for the price of being told they are related to Oprah or hail from a specific biblical tribe, this decision is often made for them before they become old enough to consent (or not). Parents have begun sending in their children’s DNA to predict sports abilities , as well as creating DNA profiles for their children in case their children are ever kidnapped. Beyond over-protective and over-intrusive parents, in early 2008 President Bush pushed signed the Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007 , which created a committee to provide, and likely extend, guidelines on how states should regulate how long blood samples of newborns should be stored . Although this newborn blood storage has yet to be used to collect DNA profiles on citizens, the existence of such capabilities seems dangerous, especially in a political environment where the erosion of civil liberties is often justified by necessity. | | | Or do you think that once digitized, the data about you contained in your DNA is the proverbial genie that can't be put back in the bottle?
-- AndreiVoinigescu - 17 Dec 2008 | |
>
> |
Giving property rights over DNA seems like a weak solution. How does that protect a report listing your entire gene sequence "ACTGAC..."? Where do you draw the line between property and speech? Is property really the regime we want to go to? That's worked so well in patents and copyrights...
-- KateVershov - 17 Dec 2008 | | | |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |