Genetic fingerprinting has been useful in many cases, such as providing solid proof for convicting rapists and murderers. One case where this happened was the murder of Shamsudden Mahmood, when 12 years after his murder, the police were finally able to have proof to convict their suspect, due to advances in DNA genetic fingerprinting. Also, to date, the DNA database that the UK has (around 4.5 million samples) helped solve 452 murders, 644 rapes and 1872 other violent crimes. Numbers like this show how effective genetic fingerprinting is for solving crimes, which shows a strong motive towards wanting to create a genetic fingerprint profile for all members of society, because with even the smallest amount of DNA evidence the criminal could be caught very quickly, without having to have the suspect brought in. It would also prevent innocent people being charged for crimes that they did not commit. However there is a down-side to this, as the evidence found at the scene may be a set up, because anyone, knowing that everyone’s genetic profile is on record, could leave a strand of someone else’s hair, and then frame them for a crime that they did not commit.
Another advantage of using genetic fingerprinting is that it can reveal who the parents of a child are, therefore if everyone had a genetic fingerprint profile it would be much easier to track down the parents for child support money. This could also be useful for people who want to immigrate to this country, to prove that they are related to someone who is already living in the country.
Having a genetic fingerprint profile for all members of society would also be useful in the case of identifying bodies, or in the case of some murders, parts of bodies. It is also reasonably quick to draw up someone’s genetic fingerprint profile – about 5 or 6 hours, and can now be achieved at a minimal cost.
However there are disadvantages to genetic fingerprinting, many people believe that it is a violation of human rights. And there is also the question of how safe our information would be, because of all the government losses of information, for example recently the loss of the child benefit information CDs. Would our genetic information be kept secure? Also there is the potential that peoples DNA information could get mixed up, and people who are innocent could get imprisoned for a crime they didn’t commit because of virtually “flawless” DNA proof. There is also the issue of contamination of the sample in the process used to identify your genetic profile, as during some of the processes, such as during the digestion process, as any bacteria or cells from the surrounding area could get into the sample, and alter the results got in the later stages of genetic fingerprinting, which would also lead to wrong results in the end, and perhaps the wrong people being arrested for crimes that they did not commit.
Another disadvantage is that your information could be used by
insurance companies, and people with results that reveal genes likely to lead to early-onset Alzheimer’s disease and hereditary and ovarian cancer are likely to be barred from health and life insurance policies.
Another reason against creating a genetic fingerprint profile is that it would cost too much to put everyone on it, especially as most of the data on there is likely to never be used. One suggestion that would save cost is a recent proposal by Gary Pugh, director of forensic sciences at Scotland Yard. He put forward that a debate was needed on how far Britain should go in identifying potential offenders, considering that experts believe that it is possible to identify future offending traits in children who are around 5 years old. However there are many disadvantages to this proposition, as it would pick young children out in the wrong way, and make them feel different to their peers. It would also rely on their teachers picking out the characteristics. This would be a cost-effective way of genetic fingerprinting, but it is a very controversial way of doing it.
In my opinion there are many reasons for creating a genetic fingerprint database of everybody, but it would take a lot of time and money, when most of the information collected would never be used. I think that genetic fingerprinting should be used mainly for catching criminals, however at the moment, if you are arrested, you can have your genetic fingerprint taken and kept, even if later you are released as innocent.
Genetic fingerprinting throws up many issues about people’s ethic rights, as some people feel that they should be able to deny a genetic fingerprint test if they wish to, however this suggests that they could have something to hide. At the current time, police have the ability to take someone’s genetic fingerprinting, if they believe them to be involved in an investigation, and the person cannot refuse.