NAME / Zeeshan Ali

ROLL NO / 19LM335

GROUP F <B6>

Dna identification legal moral and ethical ASSIGNMENT

DNA IDENTIFICATION

The techniques that are applied in identity testing are DNA fingerprinting, DNA profiling, and DNA
typing. Although there are some technical differences between these tests, the terms have been used
interchangeably. Only one-tenth of 1 percent of human DNA differs from one individual to the next and,
although estimates vary, studies suggest that forensic DNA analysis is roughly 95 percent accurate.
When performed accurately, genetic tests can uncover a disease or a tendency to develop certain
conditions, and it can lead to close relatives getting tested as well. Preventive measures or treatment
can be lifesaving.

DNA IDENTIFICATION LEGAL MORAL AND ETHICAL ISSUE

Ethical issue

Autonomy is also the right of the individual to control his or her destiny, with or without reliance on
genetic information, and to avoid interference by others with important life decisions, whether these
are based on genetic information or other factors. Respect for autonomy also implies the right of
persons to control the future use of genetic material submitted for analysis for a specific purpose
(including when the genetic material itself and the information derived from that material may be
stored for future analysis, such as in a DNA bank or registry file).

Among the various definitions of privacy, one broad definition captures its central element: privacy is a
state or condition of limited access to a person. People have privacy if others lack or do not exercise
access to them. They have privacy if they are left alone and do not suffer unauthorized intrusion by
others. Once persons undergo genetic tests, privacy includes the right to make an informed,
independent decision about whether and which others may know details of their genome (e.g., insurers,
employers, educational institutions, spouses and other family members, researchers, and social
agencies).

A second justification holds that rights to privacy are important instruments or means to other goods,
including intimate relations such as trust and friendship. Being able to control access to themselves
enables people to have various kinds of relationships with different people, rather than being equally
accessible to all others.

A third approach finds the basis for rights to privacy in respect for personal autonomy. Decisional privacy
is often very close to personal autonomy. The language of personal autonomy reflects the idea of a
domain or territory of self-rule, and thus overlaps with zones of decisional privacy.
Whatever their rationale or justification, rights of privacy are the subject of ongoing debate about their
scope and weight. However, their scope is not unlimited, and they do not always override all other
competing interests, such as the interests of others.

LEGAL Moral ISSUE

The legal concept of confidentiality focuses on the information that people provide to their physicians.
The protection of confidentiality is thought to serve an important public health goal in encouraging
people to seek access to health care. It is thought that the patient's interest can be served only in an
atmosphere of total frankness and candor. Without the promise of confidentiality, people might avoid
seeking medical treatment, thus potentially harming themselves as well as the community. An entirely
different standard of privacy protects personal information. A few court decisions find protection for
such information under the constitutional doctrine of privacy, but more commonly, privacy protection
against disclosure of personal information is found under common law tort principles. In addition, there
is a federal privacy act, as well as state statutes protecting privacy.

The legal concept of autonomy serves as the basis for numerous decisions protecting a person's bodily
integrity. In particular, cases have held that competent adults have the right to choose whether or not to
undergo medical interventions. Before people make such a choice, they have a right to be informed of
facts that might be material to their decision, such as the nature of their condition and its prognosis, the
potential risks and benefits of a proposed test or treatment, and the alternatives to the proposed
intervention. In the genetics context, health care providers have been held liable for not providing the
information that a genetic test is available.

People also have a right to be informed about and to control the subsequent use of tissue that has been
removed from their bodies. There is some leeway under the federal regulations governing research
involving human subjects for researchers to undertake subsequent research on blood samples provided
for genetic tests (as in the newborn screening context) as long as the samples are anonymous and as
long as the subsequent use was not anticipated at the time the sample was collected. If the additional
test was anticipated at the time the sample was collected, informed consent for that use should be
obtained prior to the collection of the original sample.

The consent of the patient is required to remove blood or tissue from his or her body, and also to
perform tests, but it is important that the patient be informed of all the tests which are done and that a
concern for the privacy of the patient extends to the control of tissues removed from his or her body.