Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Forensic genetics and ethical, legal and social implications beyond the clinic

Nature Genetics volume 36, pages S8–S12 (2004)Cite this article

Data on human genetic variation help scientists to understand human origins, susceptibility to illness and genetic causes of disease. Destructive episodes in the history of genetic research make it crucial to consider the ethical and social implications of research in genomics, especially human genetic variation. The analysis of ethical, legal and social implications should be integrated into genetic research, with the participation of scientists who can anticipate and monitor the full range of possible applications of the research from the earliest stages. The design and implementation of research directs the ways in which its results can be used, and data and technology, rather than ethical considerations or social needs, drive the use of science in unintended ways. Here we examine forensic genetics and argue that all geneticists should anticipate the ethical and social issues associated with nonmedical applications of genetic variation research.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Collins, F., Green, E., Guttmacher, A. & Guyer, M. A vision for the future of genomics research. Nature 422, 835–847 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kevles, D. In the Name of Eugenics (Knopf, New York, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  3. The International HapMap Consortium. Integrating ethics and science in the International HapMap Project. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 467–475 (2004).

  4. The International HapMap Consortium. The International HapMap Project. Nature 426, 789–796 (2003).

  5. Knoppers, B., Hirtle, M. & Lormeau, S. Ethical issues in international collaborative research on the human genome: the HGP and the HGDP. Genomics 34, 272–282 (1996).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Greely, H. Human genome diversity: what about the other human genome project? Nat. Rev. Genet. 2, 222–227 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Klein, R. et al. Integrating genotype and phenotype information: and overview of the PharmGKB project. Pharmacogenomics J. 1, 167–170 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Budowle, B. & Moretti, T. Genotype profiles for six population groups at the 13 CODIS short tandem repeat core loci and other PCR-based loci. Forensic Sci. Comm. 1 (1999).

  9. Frazier, R.R.E. et al. STR profiling methods and the UK National Criminal Intelligence DNA Database. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Human Identification (Orlando, Florida, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  10. National Research Council Committee on DNA Technology in Forensic Science. DNA Technology in Forensic Science (National Academy, Washington, DC, 1992).

  11. National Research Council Committee on DNA Forensic Science. An Update: The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence (National Academy, Washington, DC, 1996).

  12. Faigman, D., Kaye, D., Saks, M. & Sanders, J. Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony 207–306 (West Publishing, St. Paul, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Triggs, C. & Buckleton, J. Logical implications of applying the principles of population genetics to the interpretation of DNA profiling evidence. Forensic Sci. Int. 128, 108–114 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lander, E. & Budowle, B. DNA fingerprinting dispute laid to rest. Nature 371, 735–738 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lander, E. DNA fingerprinting on trial. Nature 339, 501–505 (1989).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lander, E. DNA fingerprinting: the NRC report. Science 260, 1221 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Burchard, E. et al. The importance of race and ethnic background in biomedical research and clinical practice. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 1170–1175 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cooper, R., Kaufman, J. & Ward, R. Race and genomics. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 1166–1170 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Feldman, M., Lewontin, R. & King, M.-C. A genetic melting-pot. Nature 424, 374 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee, S., Mountain, J. & Koenig, B. The meanings of “race” in the new genomics: implications for health disparities research. Yale J. Health Policy Law Ethics 1, 33–75 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosenberg, N. et al. Genetic structure of human populations. Science 298, 2381–2385 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Romualdi, C. et al. Patterns of human diversity, within and among continents, inferred from biallelic DNA polymorphisms. Genome Res. 12, 602–612 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Reich, D. & Goldstein, D. Detecting association in a case-control study while correcting for population stratification. Genet. Epidemiol. 20, 4–16 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Risch, N. Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race, and disease. Genome Biol. 3, 2007.1–2007.12 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wood, A. Racial differences in the response to drugs — pointers to genetic differences. N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 1393–1396 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wilson, J. et al. Population genetic structure of variable drug response. Nat. Genet. 29, 265–269 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Federal Register. Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity vol. 60 (Washington, DC, 1995).

  28. Leech, K. A question in dispute: the debate about an “ethnic” question in the Census. in Runnymede Research Report (Runnymede Trust, London, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sankar, P. DNA Typing: Galton's eugenic dream realized? in Documenting Individual Identity: The Development of State Practices in the Modern World (eds. Caplan, J. & Torpey, T.) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lowe, A., Urquhart, A., Foreman, L. & Evett, I. Inferring ethnic origin by means of an STR profile. Forensic Sci. Int. 119, 17–22 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Braun, L. Race, ethnicity, and health: can genetics explain disparities? Perspect. Biol. Med. 45, 159–174 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wade, N. Unusual Use of DNA Aided in Serial Killer Search. New York Times A28 (2003).

  33. Anonymous. Census, race, and science. Nat. Genet. 24, 97–98 (2000).

  34. Anonymous. The unexamined 'Caucasian'. Nat. Genet. 36, 541 (2004).

  35. Foster, M. & Sharp, R. Race, ethnicity, and genomics: social classifications as proxies of biological heterogeneity. Genome Res. 12, 844–850 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sankar, P. & Cho, M. Toward a new vocabulary of human genetic variation. Science 298, 1337–1338 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Novick, C.C. et al. Polymorphic human specific Alu insertions as markers for human identification. Electrophoresis 16, 1596–1601 (1995)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Sankar, P. The proliferation and risks of government DNA databases. Am. J. Public Health 87, 336–337 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kaye, D. DNA evidence: probability, population genetics and the courts. Harv. J. Law Technol. 7, 101 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  40. DNA Identification Act of 1994, Section 2401, Public Law 103-322.

  41. Edwards, E.E. Letter from President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers to U.S. Senators Honorable Orrin Hatch and Honorable Patrick Leahy Re: Proposed Expansion of the CODIS Database. S. 170 (2004)

  42. California Attorney General. Proposition 69 on the November 2, 2004 California General Election Ballot: DNA Samples, Collection, Database, Funding, Initiative Statute (2004).

  43. Willing, R. LA case triggers battle over DNA. USA Today (2003).

  44. Brown, J. Oklahoma police begin unusual DNA dragnet, privacy concerns raised. Kansas City Star (2001).

  45. Shelton v. Ann Arbor Police Department. vol. 95–1994 NZ (Mich. Cir. Ct. Washtenaw County, 1995).

  46. Leonard, J. Using DNA to trawl for killers. Los Angeles Times A1 (2001).

  47. Kaye, D. Bioethics, Bench, and Bar: Selected arguments in Landry v. Attorney General. Jurimetrics 40, 193–219 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, 701A Welch Road, Suite 1105, Palo Alto, 94304, California, USA

    Mildred K Cho

  2. University of Pennsylvania, Center for Bioethics, 3401 Market Street, Suite 320, Philadelphia, 19104-3308, Pennsylvania, USA

    Pamela Sankar

Authors
  1. Mildred K Cho
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pamela Sankar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mildred K Cho.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cho, M., Sankar, P. Forensic genetics and ethical, legal and social implications beyond the clinic. Nat Genet 36 (Suppl 11), S8–S12 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1594

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1594

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing