Here's a pitch for the next hit crime show: a lab tech for a genetic testing company receives a mysterious sample and through a series of predictably improbable events, using his unique skills and the company’s DNA database, solves a decades-old murder. The police, predictably, ignore him, until the killer strikes again. The murderer is brought to justice and the lab tech is employed as a consultant.
Let's call it "Born This Way."
It might make a great TV show, but it's already happening in real life. In recent years, police have partnered with commercial genetic repositories like FamilyTreeDNA and Ancestry.com to catch criminals. The practice is called forensic genealogy, and it's closed multiple long-cold high profile cases.
From a single sample, police can determine markers like race, eye and hair color and familial connections. Police already have access to the Combined DNA Index System, a national database of DNA of convicted offenders, but partnering with private companies would vastly expand their data set.
But do the police have the right to use this data? Not without permission. People should own their genetic data. The police can’t enter their home and take their financial records without a warrant. Why should they be able to seize even more intimate information without the owner even knowing? Taking the data would seem to violate the constitution's guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure.
There is no federal standard. Few states have any laws. (Most states let companies share data with any third party.) Some companies give the data to the police, while others require a warrant or their customer’s permission. A few states, like California, Utah and Arizona, have passed laws requiring explicit consent for the disclosure of customers' genetic data as well as requiring companies to delete DNA samples if requested.
Pennsylvania offers its people no protections. In January, state Rep. Emily Kinkead, D-Allegheny, introduced the Genetic Materials Privacy and Compensation Act. H.B. 2283 would force companies to prominently disclose what data they are collecting and with whom it will be shared. It would require companies to get permission before sharing information with any third party. It's currently sitting in the Consumer Affairs committee. It should move forward and become state law.
First Published: April 21, 2022, 6:39 p.m.