Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2012-10
Minors or suspects? A discussion of the legal and ethical issues surrounding the indefinite storage of DNA collected from children aged 10–18 years on the National DNA Database in England and Wales
There are currently over 250,000 children between the ages of 10 and 18 years who have their genetic information stored on the National DNA Database. This paper explores the legal and ethical issues surrounding this controversial subject, with particular focus on juvenile capacity and the potential results of criminalizing young children and adolescents. The implications of the adverse legal judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in S and Marper v UK (2008) and the violation of Article 8 of the Convention are discussed. The authors have considered the requirement to balance the rights of the individual, particularly those of minors, against the need to protect the public and have compared the position in Scotland to that of the rest of the UK. The authors conclude that a more ethically acceptable alternative could be the creation of a separate forensic database for children aged 10–18 years, set up to safeguard the interests of those who have not been convicted of any crime.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Staley. The Police National DNA Database: balancing crime, detection, human rights and privacy. GeneWatch UK Report. January2005, Section 1
2.
3.
GeneWatch and ARCH Press Release. Over 100,000 innocent young people now on the National DNA Database; Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) consultations. See http://www.genewatch.org/article.shtml?als[cid]=551990&als[itemid]=553653 (last checked 22 April 2011)
4.
Nuffield Council on bioethics. DNA Of Innocent People Should Not Be Kept By Police. See http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/news/dna-innocent-people-should-not-be-kept-police (last checked 22 April 2011)
5.
TownsendM, AsthanaA. Put young children on DNA list urge police. The Observer 16 March2008
6.
National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA). National DNA Database statistics. See http://www.npia.police.uk/en/13338.htm (last checked 27 January 2012)
7.
Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. Postnote: The National DNA Database, 2006:258
8.
National DNA Database Strategy Board. DNA database annual report 2007–2009, 2009
9.
National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA). Case Studies. See http://www.npia.police.uk/en/13337.htm (last checked 27 January 2012)
10.
Metcalfe. Keeping the right people on the DNA database: science and public protection. Justice Response to Home Office Consultation, 2009
11.
GeneWatch UK. Police Retention of DNA: A Briefing for Counsellors and Police Authorities in England and Wales. See http://www.genewatch.org/uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483c1c3d49e4/Councillorsbrief07_2.pdf (last checked 29 April 2011)
12.
House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. The National DNA Database; Eighth Report of Session 2009–2010. House of Commons. London: The Stationary Office, 2010
13.
GuillenM, LareuMV, PestoniC, SalasA, CarracedoA. Ethical-legal problems of DNA databases in criminal investigation. J Med Ethics2000;26:266–71
14.
Great Britain. Criminal and Justice Act: Elizabeth II. Part 1.London: The Stationary Office, 2003
15.
Staley. The Police National DNA Database: balancing crime, detection, human rights and privacy. GeneWatch UK Report. January2005, Section 4
16.
Wallace. The UK National DNA Database: balancing crime detection, human rights and privacy. EMBO Rep2006;7:26–30
17.
18.
Staley. The Police National DNA Database: balancing crime, detection, human rights and privacy. GeneWatch UK Report. January2005, Section 6
19.
ToomV. Bodies of science and law: forensic DNA profiling, biological bodies, and biopower. J Law Soc2012;39:150–66
20.
The Ethics Group. National DNA Database 2nd Annual Report, April2009
21.
Great Britain. The Crime and Disorder Act: Elizabeth II. London: The Stationary Office, 1998
22.
PatynA, DierickxK. Forensic DNA databases: genetic testing as a societal choice. J Med Ethics2010;36:319
23.
PetersonM, RobbinsB. Using the MMPI-A to predict recidivism in adjudicated minors. Appl Psychol Crim Justice2008
BaileyS. Treatment of delinquents. In: RutterM, TaylorE, eds. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry – Modern Approaches to Treatment. 4th edn. Blackwell, 2002
26.
Youth Justice Board. Risk and protective factors. See http://www.yjb.gov.uk/Publications/Resources/Downloads/Risk%20Factors%20Summary%20fv.pdf (last checked 24 April 2011)
27.
MacArthur Foundation. Towards a Juvenile Justice System that is Effective and Fair. Remarks by Jonathan Fanton at the National Conference on Juvenile Justice and Adolescent Development, 22 September 2006
28.
House of Lords and House of Commons: Joint Committee on Human Rights. Retention, use and destruction of biometric data: correspondence with Government. Twenty-seventh Report of Session 2008–2009, November2009
29.
TozzoP, PegoraroR, CaenazzoL. Biobanks for non-clinical purposes and the new law on forensic bio banks: does the Italian context protect the rights of minors?J Med Ethics2010;36:775
30.
NPIA. NPIA and the DNA Database. See http://www.npia.police.uk/en/14189.htm (last checked 1 November 2011)
31.
Forensic Science Service. Craig Harman – Family DNA link offers crime breakthrough. See http://www.forensic.gov.uk/html/media/case-studies/f-39.html (last checked 27 January 2012)
32.
Staley. The Police National DNA Database: balancing crime, detection, human rights and privacy. GeneWatch UK Report. January2005, Section 7
33.
House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. Young Black People and the Criminal Justice System; Second Report of Session 2006–2007, Vol. 1, Section 33, June2007:19
34.
National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA). Basic Facts and FAQs. See http://www.npia.police.uk/en/13340.htm (last checked 27 January 2012)
35.
The Ethics Group. National DNA Database 1st Annual Report,2008
36.
MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent development and juvenile justice. Issue Brief 1; Adolescent legal competence in court. See http://www.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7BB0386CE3-8B29-4162-8098-E466FB856794%7D/ADJJCOMPETENCE.PDF (last checked 15 April 2011)
37.
Great Britain. The Children's Act: Elizabeth II. London: The Stationary Office, 1989
38.
Great Britain. Mental Capacity Act: Elizabeth II. London: The Stationary Office, 2005, Section 2
39.
40.
41.
MerloDF, KnudsenLE, MatusiewiczK, NiebrojL, VahakangasKH. Ethics in studies on children and environmental health. J Med Ethics2007;33:408
42.
SarkarS. Adolescent capacity in the criminal justice arena. Adv Psychiatr Treat2011;17:5–11
43.
The Scottish Government. Legislation- Scotland. See http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/public-safety/Police/dna-forensics/legislationscotland (last checked 23 April 2011)
44.
Great Britain. Crime and Security Act: Elizabeth II. London: The Stationary Office, 2010
45.
The Ethics Group. National DNA Database 3rd Annual Report, 2010
46.
HeppleB. Forensic databases: implications of the cases of S and Harper. Med Sci Law2009;49:77–87
47.
UNICEF. Convention on the Rights of the Child. See http://www.unicef.org/crc/ (last checked 5 May 2011)
