Is a DNA datatbase necessary for all citizens?

DNA, an acronym of deoxyribonucleic acid, is a genetic material found not only in humans but nearly in all other organisms. Specifically, it is evident in the cell nucleus whereby almost all cells in an individual's body virtually contain it (Thelen and Thiry 266). The DNA in the nucleus is referred to as nuclear DNA. The mitochondria, conversely, contain a little of DNA as well. It is known as mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA (West 554). Both of them constitute four chemical bases, cytosine, thymine adenine, and guanine, which make up the DNA information storing code. According to the study, more than 99 percent of the approximately 3 billion bases which make up the human DNA are identical in all beings (U.S NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE). Their particular sequence determines the information, which characterizes individuality.

When a DNA is obtained, bases are likened to form a sequence in alphabetical letters. Nonetheless, to store information, the sequences are then combined in pairs to make up units referred to as base pairs, whereby each base is connected to sugar and phosphate molecules thereby forming a nucleotide. A nicleotide is a long spiral strands called a double helix. (Nobel Prize). Importantly, the outstanding property of such DNA parts is their ability to replicate. A strand of DNA in a double helix provides a pattern for reproducing the order of the bases, which is also a significant characteristic during cell division (Alberts B 21)

All the same, sequencing in this context is the process of determining the order of the four bases that are the building blocks of a DNA molecule. The genetic information contained in a particular DNA segment is scientifically extracted from the process. Nonetheless, sequencing at times may be employed to determine the stretches of DNA that contain data and those that carry regulatory instructions (Chaisson 608-610). As such, it is evident that there is no genetic function or evolution without acquisition of such information.

Consequently, not all biological substances provide ideal DNA samples. However, in the forensic laboratories, DNA information can be extracted from a variety of human specimens, including saliva, semen, urine, hair, tissues, bones or cheek cells. For example, in a crime scene, various materials may be collected and investigated for DNA. For instance, there could be traces of sweat, blood or skin cells. A bullet as well could carry with it useful body tissue. As such, all human cells, in exception of the red cells, carry chromosomic information. Furthermore, others samples may be obtained from semen, through a unique process called differential extraction.

As a commonly used term as well, DNA profiling, is the process used to derive the particular DNA profile, from an individual’s body tissue. In spite of the uniqueness, all human beings portray that each person's DNA is identical to another's, via distinct regions, called polymorphic. Everybody as such, inherits a unique combination of polymorphisms, and it is this DNA polymorphism that can be used to provide a DNA profile. The profiles are significant in identifying the origin of a DNA sample at a crime investigation.

The debate on whether there should be a DNA database for all citizens has sparked numerous controversies. People who support the issue have provided their reasons while those against it have some equitable reasons as well. First, for individuals that think keeping a DNA database for all citizens is an excellent idea, claim that it will help provide certainty to a court case against a defendant. As such, if a DNA evidence is presented, it will be easy for the jury to decide upon a case immediately (Doleac 1). Availability of DNA evidence may provide stronger grounds for convicting guilty parties.

The DNA databases will help keep the society safer. DNA samples, once registered can be put into comparison with previous samples that already exist in the database. As a consequence, it will be easy to identify criminals and make it much easier for the law enforcement to get them off the streets. All the same, as a requirement of the law, the collection of DNA is done by warrant. It, therefore, means that no DNA is collected or registered without the consent of the owner.

Some people feel that collection may do more harm than good as well. They argue that anything in a database can be hacked and used for alternative purposes. In fact, the data could be manipulated to serve the hacker’s purposes (Conley, Mehmet, and Asaf 26). For instance, a victim’s DNA information in the databases may be blackmailed to eliminate him/her from a case. Alternatively, volunteers who on the other hand offer their DNA samples for the exclusion of crime, are also often not sure if their profile is included in a national database. As a consequence, therefore, the law-abiding citizens may continually be treated as criminals by law enforcement (Smith).

Finally, despite the probabilities of someone possessing a duplicate DNA, the fact remains that its profile is not 100 percent accurate. The scientific process still continues in human, hence making people fallible (Steele and Balding 361-366). Nonetheless, just because no cases of DNA duplication have been found during an investigation, it does not mean that there is no evidence. We just cannot be so sure that each's DNA profile is unique.

In conclusion, I believe that any government’s intention to keep a DNA database is in good faith safeguards its citizens. However, it might also make citizens vulnerable by exposing their personal information. Databases are prone to hacking and hence could endanger the lives citizens. Despite everything, after weighing opinions from both sides, I remain firm that keeping a database of all citizens’ DNA does more good harm than.

Credibility Table