Letter to the Editor

Reply to “Bracketing off population does not advance ethical reflection on EVCs: A reply to Kayser and Schneider” by A. M’charek, V. Toom, and B. Prainsack

Forensic DNA phenotyping (FDP) is an umbrella term for practices seeking to infer likely phenotypic characteristics based on crime scene DNA. Specifically, it is intended to help criminal investigators find an unknown suspected perpetrator by providing information about what the suspected perpetrator may look like based on the analysis of DNA left at the crime scene. While many purport the usefulness of FDP in this regard, its probabilistic nature, as well as its ability to disclose information about an individual that may be considered private raises a range of ethical and social concerns. This paper reports findings from interviews with thirty civil society stakeholders across nine European countries. Our findings reflect the wide variation of views in Europe regarding if, when and/or how the technology should be used in the criminal justice system, and we illustrate this by presenting the different ways in which our participants strike a balance between the potential usefulness of the technology, and the various ethical and social considerations.

Forensic DNA phenotyping (FDP) technology represents a set of techniques that aim to predict physical features of criminal suspects, such as eye, skin and hair colour, and also ethnicity through the inference of biogeographic ancestry from their biological samples. In contrast to other forensic technologies, FDP is not used for identification purposes but valued for its potential intelligence value. Since features predicted by FDP relate to common traits shared by different population groups, critical voices highlight that this technology may (re)create dynamics of collectivisation of suspect populations.

Looking at the criminal justice system, this paper aims to explore the diverse understandings of FDP by professionals working in forensic laboratories and by the members of police forces, alongside the automatic exchange of genetic profiles to fight cross-border crime. Their perceptions are explored according to the perceived potential investigative value and potential threats of FDP. Furthermore, we discuss how racial issues are implicitly and explicitly present in these narratives. Results show that FDP may be ushering in a new assemblage of racial issues along three entangled dimensions: the differentiating power of externally visible characteristics, the comparison between genetic and eyewitness testimonies, and the collectivisation of suspicion.

During the last decade, DNA profiling and the use of DNA databases have become two of the most employed instruments of police investigations. This very rapid establishment of forensic genetics is yet far from being complete. In the last few years novel types of analyses have been presented to describe phenotypically a possible perpetrator. We conducted the present study among German speaking Swiss residents for two main reasons: firstly, we aimed at getting an impression of the public awareness and acceptance of the Swiss DNA database and the perception of a hypothetical DNA database containing all Swiss residents. Secondly, we wanted to get a broader picture of how people that are not working in the field of forensic genetics think about legal permission to establish phenotypic descriptions of alleged criminals by genetic means.

Even though a significant number of study participants did not even know about the existence of the Swiss DNA database, its acceptance appears to be very high. Generally our results suggest that the current forensic use of DNA profiling is considered highly trustworthy. However, the acceptance of a hypothetical universal database would be only as low as about 30% among the 284 respondents to our study, mostly because people are concerned about the security of their genetic data, their privacy or a possible risk of abuse of such a database. Concerning the genetic analysis of externally visible characteristics and biogeographical ancestry, we discover a high degree of acceptance. The acceptance decreases slightly when precise characteristics are presented to the participants in detail. About half of the respondents would be in favor of the moderate use of physical traits analyses only for serious crimes threatening life, health or sexual integrity. The possible risk of discrimination and reinforcement of racism, as discussed by scholars from anthropology, bioethics, law, philosophy and sociology, is mentioned less frequently by the study participants than we would have expected.

A national DNA database and the widespread use of DNA analyses for police and justice have an impact on the entire society. Therefore the concerns of lay persons from the respective population should be heard and considered. The aims of this study were to draw a broader picture of the public opinion on DNA databasing and to contribute to the debate about the possible future use of genetics to reveal phenotypic characteristics. Our data might provide an additional perspective for experts involved in regulatory or legislative processes.