As of May 2019, DNA analysis site GEDmatch has updated its privacy policy for users. Following the update, users can opt out of allowing law enforcement from accessing their genetic information; the option will be off by default, and users can change it if they wish. Only if a user has opted in may their data may be viewed if investigators are working cases involving “murder, non-negligent manslaughter, aggravated rape, robbery, or aggravated assault.”

GEDMatch offers tools for analyzing DNA by users from the comfort of their home. When an individual sends in a DNA kit from 23andMe or AncestryDNA, GEDMatch allows them to connect their results to glean more information about their genetics and genealogy.

Previously, police were able to search the site when investigating rape and murder cases. An exception was made, however, when they were granted access to user data to solve a case involving a seventeen-year-old believed to have assaulted a senior citizen. The victim expressed belief that her attacker, who allegedly put her in a chokehold, sought to kill her, and so GEDmatch allowed access to the data. BuzzFeed news reported on the BuzzFeed news reported on the event and GEDMatch responded by introducing this tightened privacy policy. GEDmatch cofounder Curtis Roger says of the change: “ethically, it is a better option” and “the right thing to do.”

GEDMatch has been involved in solving felonies before. In recent years Joseph James DeAngelo was arrested as the suspected Golden State Killer after a DNA sample likely from one of his relatives yielded a partial match with samples from a crime scene. Over a dozen murders and over fifty rapes in California are believed to have been committed by the Golden State Killer in the 1970s and 80s. DeAngelo was charged in April with eight counts of first-degree murder with special circumstances, then with four more counts of first-degree murder on May 10th.

Like curious genealogists, from hobbyists to professionals looking for genetic or familial insights, law enforcement agencies would submit DNA samples to sites like GEDMatch to learn more about potential suspects in a growing practice known as genetic genealogy. Also known as forensic genealogy, this procedure has police use databases and related records to learn about individuals involved in a crime.

This does not just include suspects; victims’ identities can be brought to light when matches are made to their relatives who connect their DNA reports to GEDMatch. Indeed, the DNA analysis has been utilized in cases of international and historical significance, including successfully identifying the remains of the Romanov family- and disproving any pretenders.

Closer to home, the case of the Golden State Killer proves to be just one example of genetic databases solving cold cases among many others that brought closure to victims and their families. By combining with and having access to a broader database than their usual Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), investigators have identified as many as 50 suspects using genetic genealogy.

CeCe Moore, chief genetic genealogist with Parabon NanoLabs, told ABC News “these techniques are proving to be invaluable in dozens of cold cases where the suspect has been successful in staying under the radar for years or, even, decades.” In April of 2018, genetic genealogy unmasked the suspected killer of Alaskan college student Sophie Sergie, who was found assaulted, stabbed, and shot in a bathroom at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. November 2018 saw the arrest of the suspected murderer of Christine Franke who was killed in 2001 when DNA samples from the crime scene connected to a relative of the suspect. Moore believes restricting access to this type of data “is very likely to cost lives.”

While police access to genetic data has solved numerous rape and murder cases, such practices have been met with wariness from privacy advocates. Companies like 23andMe and AncestryDNA share stored genetic information with drug and pharmaceutical companies which is then used to research and test medications. This is allowed as long as users opt into informed consent research.

But informed consent does not stop data leaks or concern that, if revealed to their peers, people’s genetics may be discriminated against; fears abound that employers, insurers, or law enforcement may target or exclude based on DNA. Some call the notion dystopian, that individuals with any sort of power over others could access information about the very building blocks of other individuals, and what started as a fun way to gain personal insight becomes a way to be targeted.

In addition to privacy for one’s self, there are also the privacy rights of others to consider. Science magazine reports that 60% of DNA database searches unearth third cousins for Americans of European lineage, so when an individual shares their DNA information, they are sharing genetic data about others who did not agree to share and do not even have an account with the database.

Even investigators involved in cold cases cracked open by genetic genealogy saw ethical questions as being inevitable. Retired detective Paul Holes feels that “it would not surprise me, years down the road, if this could be a U.S. Supreme Court issue” and that soon search warrants will need to be written up for these types of searches.

The advent of genetic genealogy, questions and answers arise from all relevant parties. Users desire their innate right to security for their most personal, permanent information. Law enforcement seeks an effective way to solve cold cases and bring closure to victims. Genetic databases, from direct-to-consumer services like 23andMe and AncestryDNA to third-party databases like GEDmatch, must navigate the ethical expectations and revelations that come only with time and open discussion. Each day since GEDmatch’s policy change has produced feedback from supporters and opponents alike, each who DNA services will continue to need to hear out.

Share this: Twitter

Facebook



Related