DNA From Children

[Ally]

[QUOTE=smezenen;89511][QUOTE=Ally;89507]

2- im a retired soldier so thats how i know we soldiers have ours on file and yes its for identification purposes why else would it be on file DUH.

I didn't challenge the fact that it was on file. I said choosing to join the armed forces was a VOLUNTEER effort. You chose to do it. It was not the government FORCING you to do so.

3- part of my job as a soldier was to perform duties as the drug and alchol prevention officer. I administered the annual urinalisis to other soldiers and to civilian government empployees that work on the base i was assigned to and guess what we tracked results thru the DNA in the proteins in the urin.

First of all, I don't believe that you gave a drug test to every single soldier and civilian government employee every year. Absolutely flat out, do not believe it. However, let's suppose that your little corner of the armed forces DID in fact test every single member, once again: armed forces, volunteer. This does not translate to EVERY single government agency like you said. Every single government agency DOES NOT collect a drug test every year. Flat out. Does not.

And considering that there would be maybe a scant few DNA cells of the person available in every sample, I truly do not believe that someone sat there and analysed the cup of pee to find the DNA profile of the soldier and tracked it via DNA. Considering that the vast majority of drug testing in the last ten years requires a pee and dip a stick, where precisely did this elaborate DNA profiling take place? You guys sent every cup of pee to an Lab to have the DNA of the soldier tracked? and you all got back your DNA coded pee from every single soldier and civilian employee....in what...a year?

4- the lost child service that my children are registered with submitte dDNA samples to the FBI repository so that If my children ever become missing the could be (dare i say it) identified.

Once again, a service YOU volunteered your child for. You CHOSE to give your child's DNA to the FBI, effectively screwing their privacy.

5- My wife is a medical administrative assistant one of here duties right now is to digitize old medical records that means she sees alot of them and most of the ones she is dealing wth these days are Medicare records and they require a DNA sample be entered for anyh surgery.

Oh. More personal accounts that have no factual basis or any evidence to back up the assertion. Got it. Considering that hospitals are lucky if they don't manage to cut off your balls when you go in for an appendectomy, who knew that they were all so well run that the surgeon or tech could identify everyone who was a patient of medicare to collect a sample. Uh huh. Ayup.

[smezenen]

But Smez, every one of those things is good thing and done for a reason. Roy

Roy,
I didnt say it was a bad thing, in fact I believe its a very good thing. If my post lead anyone to think I condemn the practice then let me correct the record having everyones DNA on file, with their permission, is a good thing.

[smezenen]

[QUOTE=Ally;89513][QUOTE=smezenen;89511]

I didn't challenge the fact that it was on file. I said choosing to join the armed forces was a VOLUNTEER effort. You chose to do it. It was not the government FORCING you to do so.




First of all, I don't believe that you gave a drug test to every single soldier and civilian government employee every year. Absolutely flat out, do not believe it. However, let's suppose that your little corner of the armed forces DID in fact test every single member, once again: armed forces, volunteer. This does not translate to EVERY single government agency like you said. Every single government agency DOES NOT collect a drug test every year. Flat out. Does not.

And considering that there would be maybe a scant few DNA cells of the person available in every sample, I truly do not believe that someone sat there and analysed the cup of pee to find the DNA profile of the soldier and tracked it via DNA. Considering that the vast majority of drug testing in the last ten years requires a pee and dip a stick, where precisely did this elaborate DNA profiling take place? You guys sent every cup of pee to an Lab to have the DNA of the soldier tracked? and you all got back your DNA coded pee from every single soldier and civilian employee....in what...a year?



Once again, a service YOU volunteered your child for. You CHOSE to give your child's DNA to the FBI, effectively screwing their privacy.



Oh. More personal accounts that have no factual basis or any evidence to back up the assertion. Got it. Considering that hospitals are lucky if they don't manage to cut off your balls when you go in for an appendectomy, who knew that they were all so well run that the surgeon or tech could identify everyone who was a patient of medicare to collect a sample. Uh huh. Ayup.

Ally,
you may chose to believe what you like and if i touched a nerve then im sorry but in the end i refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed and uninformed person. good day madam.

[Ally]

Ah..which basically means that you can't actually answer any of the questions put to you.

Accepted.

[Ally]

So can anyone explain how tracking someone's drug test through their DNA sequence would work?

Because basically a DNA profile looks something like (creative rendition) This:




And they are going to say That guy: Mr dash line dash line line tested positive for meth, but how would the possibly know who dash line dash line line was? I mean wouldn't it have been easier to track them via their name and say Bob Smith tested positive for meth?

Seems a very expensive and time consuming way of keeping track of someone drug results. Not to mention how did they ever connect dash line dash line line to Bob Smith if Bob Smith is a civilian contractor since they aren't required to give a DNA sample?

Not to mention, considering how long it takes for a DNA profile in the matter of a murder, how long precisely did it take for these DNA profiles to be found from a cup of pee (which may not have even contained any usable DNA) to all be adequately tested?

And yeah Smez, after your last post there you've lost any moral highground. So your indignation over my tin foil hat comment rings a bit hollow now.

[Roy Corduroy]

Yes Smez, I understand you now.

Hi Ally,

The child ID program is encouraged by law enforcement for two reasons. (1) To have the child's DNA to help in an investigation, and (2) pedophiles know the program exists.

You are the first person I've heard characterize parents who participate as "hysterical" and "screwing with their child's privacy." I don't agree.

Roy

[Ally]

That's fine if you don't. However, when that child grows up and is denied insurance because their DNA profile indicates that they are at risk for breast cancer or Huntington's or some other type disease, or they are refused a job because of genetic predisposition that might make them croak early and are therefore a poor risk maybe you'll change your mind about casually passing out relevant data on your child.

Editing to add: if a child is kidnapped, what exact good does the DNA do? I mean if the child is found, the parents can be tested to see if the child is a match if that is necessary. If a child is kidnapped there will be that child's DNA all over their room and dirty clothes. So why is it necessary to submit a DNA test prior to a child even being kidnapped?

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Ally,

Here is the link for the Florida program. (click) The parent keeps possession of the sample. According to this "Please be advised, this is only a blood sample. The blood sample DOES NOT need to be analyzed for DNA unless it is required for investigative purposes. If analysis is required, law enforcement will do it free of charge." That seems to answer the privacy concern.

As to the investigative benefit: " If a child is abducted and moved to various locations, this sample may be useful for placing the child at each site and helpful in convicting the perpetrator."

Roy

[Ally]

Hi Roy,

Those were the child programs I was speaking of in my earlier response. However, my comments in the last couple of posts were in relation to Smez saying that his child's DNA sample has been sent to the FBI to be stored in their database in case something ever happens to his child.
This makes no logical sense whatsoever to me.

However, the child program mentioned is equally redundant. It doesn't take blood or a program to collect DNA from a kidnapped child. That can be done after the actual crime. Parents who collect blood from their children in anticipation of their kidnapping are on the hysterical side. A hair from their brush would work just as well.

[smezenen]

And yeah Smez, after your last post there you've lost any moral highground. So your indignation over my tin foil hat comment rings a bit hollow now.

You Ma"am lost the moral high ground with your first reply to my post. Had you asked for clarification instead of insulting me with your tinfoil hat comment i would have answered you questions. I am not the one who started the insults.

[Ally]

The fact that you keep responding to me and not answering my questions proves that if there were any logical basis to what you posted, you would have replied. There clearly isn't.

So now you are just going to say that it's my fault you didn't answer despite the fact that I "insulted" you in one post only and you replied to that post with elaboration and answers to my questions.

I have not insulted you in any further posts and yet now suddenly you are refusing to elaborate or answer any of my questions and posting entire posts that do nothing but insult me under the "you started it" principle. But I am sure that the reason why you are suddenly not answering my very relevant questions is because of that initial post and not because you have no logical answer.

[Roy Corduroy]

However, the child program mentioned is equally redundant. It doesn't take blood or a program to collect DNA from a kidnapped child. That can be done after the actual crime. Parents who collect blood from their children in anticipation of their kidnapping are on the hysterical side. A hair from their brush would work just as well.

Hi Ally,

I carefully highlighted the relevant portions from the Florida site addressing your concerns and questions. We agree there is no privacy issue.

You said " It doesn't take blood or a program to collect DNA from a kidnapped child.That can be done after the actual crime."

That makes no sense, Ally.

This is for a kidnapping, disappearance, or natural disaster.

You said "a hair brush would work as well." What, leave it to chance? What if you have 4 children? Which hair brush? Prove that in court.

Again, please read the portion I highlighted. This is the optimum tool for law enforcement. Note with the upmost care the line from Florida "helpful in convicting the perpetrator." Ironclad scientific evidence to present in court that will stand up to a defense lawyer's challenge.

Again, characterizing parents who do this as "hysterical" is a unique opinion I don't think I've ever heard. It's widely done all over the country. For obvious good reason.

Roy

[Ally]

There are several places you can find unique DNA from a child. You might have 4 children, but they probably aren't sharing underwear. You might have four children but they don't all share a pillow. And as with any crime, the other 3 children can be excluded with only the needed DNA sourced after the fact the same as with any other crime where they have to find unique DNA profiles. I would love to know in exactly how many cases have these "DNA profiles" from one of these programs actually been used in the prosecution of a crime?

And as for natural disasters, chances are good if the body of the child is in such bad shape that it requires a DNA match, what are the chances that the parent is going to be able to find the paper envelope that contains their child's DNA sample? Or that it will still be in a condition to be tested after a natural disaster? If a child needs to be identified in those cases, a parent to child match is probably going to be the best bet.

[Mr.Hyde]

Re original post-reckon it's a good idea.I'm very much for civil liberties,unless they protect the guilty.Think about it.
Reckon JTR would not have got as far as he did if this sort of screening was available then.

[Roy Corduroy]

Good questions, Ally and I don't have the answers. Like how many successful prosecutions. Or the natural disaster part. But this is how it's done these days. It's unform, it's free. It's official.

Anyway, nice talking to you. And did you see, I made Sergeant? Thank you Stephen and staff for providing this fun and informative forum.

Roy

And remember, this was originally an English police matter thread, and they'll be awake soon. So I'm gonna get while the gettin's good.