A cautionary note

[Baeau]

Hmmmmm.....Big brother sees you. Hears you. AND, he's in your genes! Should this be moved to Your Worst Puns?

Seriously, much of technology is catching up to that which writers came up with for sci-fi / thrillers that have been produced. Many, back in the early/mid 60's.

[Tobus]

A Reuters new reports provided the following statement tonight:

"Investigators in California narrowed in on the Golden State Killer suspect by using the genetic profile of a relative on ancestry websites that solicit DNA samples from users, a Sacramento County prosecutor said on Thursday."

Just a heads up.

I was going to post that very thing. For obvious reasons, we should all be glad they caught this guy. But the method they used was just ...wow. They didn't even need his DNA to find him. They narrowed him down by the DNA of his family members. So I guess none of us really have privacy for our DNA unless our blood relatives are also being careful. Considering I have a twin brother who isn't careful like I am, that concerns me!

[MacGumerait]

Father Bill , you are absolutely correct . People should be very cautious about doing the DNA testing .

First off , there is the emotional caution ..... not liking your roots or finding out unseemly family information .

Secondly ( and very important ) , there is the legal caution .

It is a positive thing that law enforcement can use DNA to solve cases and convict or used to protect an innocent person .

However , in today's world with all the DNA testing companies their data can be subpoenaed in mass by law enforcement in the effort to solve a criminal case .

There have been several news stories in the past few years whereby an innocent person has become part of a criminal case and considered a " person of interest " or sometimes " a possible suspect " simply because their DNA data from these mass subpoenaed records have a somewhat close tie to a crime for very various reasons ..... when in reality and after the case was solved , they had no tie to anything involving the case.

DNA testing is subject to errors by the DNA testing company and by the law enforcement labs which can lead to unintended consequences down the road .... contaminated samples , margins of error in testing , etc.

So the BIG cautionary thing to consider from a legal standpoint is .... do you want to put your DNA into a database that can be accessed and used for all kinds of reasons ?

I must admit , I was once curious and wanted to do the DNA testing thing , although , after reading and hearing these news stories , I chose not to participate .

I know my family's roots as I am only a second generation American and my family were Scottish immigrants but I can appreciate those who want to do DNA testing .

I am not a conspiratorial type person , even though my rant might suggest it . I just agree with Father Bill's word of caution .


Cheers , Mike

[Katia]

I was going to post that very thing. For obvious reasons, we should all be glad they caught this guy. But the method they used was just ...wow. They didn't even need his DNA to find him. They narrowed him down by the DNA of his family members. So I guess none of us really have privacy for our DNA unless our blood relatives are also being careful. Considering I have a twin brother who isn't careful like I am, that concerns me!

Yes, that's up there with knowing that even though I try to be careful about my privacy on Facebook, every time my "friends" play Farmville or whatever, they expose me because it requires access to information about a person's friends as well. If someone wants to give up their own privacy, that's their right. When they can give up mine without my knowledge or consent, that's frightening.

[Iowish]

I did 23andme over 6 years ago. I did it because my 3rd cousin wanted to do a family DNA study. Since he is descended from "double cousins" 3 times over, he needed at least 1 3rd cousin from each of 6 different lines. I was the first 3rd cousin from our shared line he met. He gifted me a test kit. In spite of starting out with over a dozen relatives from that family (paternal grandfather's) in the test, I have made the most discoveries I have been made have been through my maternal grandmother's family.

[Katia]

...and by the way, it you come back to me with "blood is thicker than water" and an argument that you should stick always to blood relatives first, then being a priest, I even have scriptural evidence to suggest further thought on the matter.

I've always found it a bit strange that people will claim kinship with someone they've never met and perhaps will never met, in a different part of the world, based on the fact that they seem to share a last name. I feel a closer affinity to people I work with (and, arguably, we all belong to a closer "club" than that based on a name). But then again, I've also never had a desire to trace genealogy and look up supposed relatives I never knew-- the ones I already have are fine for me. Perhaps it's some sort of lacking in curiosity on my part. I love finding out where ancestors have come from and lived and how, but that's something different.

That is in my mind, ond of the (few) advantages, although perhaps more rare than we might think. No, I was referring to the sort of thing that comes out as in the last post about the father/ grandfather and all of the family disruption such a discovery could cause.

Although it certainly doesn't have to be shared. No one even needs to know you took the test. Certainly those who might take issue with the results don't need to be told ahead of time, and in the case of others, surely a simple "yep, we're mostly from Russia" would suffice.