Skip to: Main Content | Site Links

Nuffield Council on Bioethics / Home

text only | home | site map | web accessibility

Minutes of the meeting held on 22nd January 2007

Wed, 6 June 2007

NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS WORKING GROUP ON FORENSIC USE OF BIOINFORMATION: ETHICAL ISSUES

Minutes of the 2nd meeting held on 22nd January 2007

PRESENT: Professor Bob Hepple (Chair), Graham Cooke, Professor Graeme Laurie, Dr Bronwyn Parry, Professor Andrew Read and Robin Williams

SECRETARIAT: Dr Carole McCartney (Project Manager), Dr Catherine Moody and Caroline Rogers

APOLOGIES: Professor Søren Holm

Introduction
1 The Chair welcomed the Working Group to its second meeting. The minutes of the first meeting were agreed as an accurate record. Details of the experts who were to address the Working Group at the fact-finding meeting (later the same day) and their respective roles were provided.

2 The Chair asked WG members to consider what questions should be put to the invited guests, indicating some that had been suggested by the Project Manager.

Public consultation
3 The number of responses to the consultation had reached 100, mainly from individuals up until this point. It was expected that responses from organisations would be received nearer the close of the consultation (at the end of January).

4 The Secretariat had prepared a preliminary summary of the first 70 responses. It was suggested that members should particularly read responses relevant to their areas and they might also select quotations for use in the discussion paper that reflected the responses received.

Fact-finding meetings
5 Ideas for further meetings were discussed. Of the proposed fact-finding meetings, the priorities were to meet fingerprint experts, private DNA providers and the Custodian of the National DNA Database (NDNAD).

6 The issue of fingerprints was raised, in particular the automation of fingerprint capture with handheld devices. In light of such technological developments, it would be advantageous if the Group could have the opportunity to meet with a member of the Police Information and Technology Organisation (PITO), the body that oversaw the fingerprint database (IDENT1). It was stressed that fingerprinting and its reliability remained vital to discussions, particularly with regard to presentation in court and use to convict people. A focus on oversight and regulation issues arising from the use both of DNA and fingerprinting would perhaps be useful.

7 The issue of international transfer of data was also raised as being an important topic, on which expert advice could be sought.

Peer review
8 Peer reviewers needed to be chosen. Specialists in the following areas were proposed: ethics, the law, social science and science as they applied to the forensic use of bioinformation. In addition, an international reviewer could be approached for an overseas perspective. The Council would consider the suggestions for peer reviewers.

Draft discussion Paper
9 The Chair thanked members for their contributions to the first draft of the discussion paper and members agreed on how each would contribute to further drafting of the paper. The provisional structure was considered and suggestions made for improvements. Paragraph and page numbers should be added, and the text should feature explanatory ‘boxes’.

10 It was clear that public concerns about the amount of information that could be obtained from a DNA profile needed to be addressed. Therefore the important differences between a DNA profile and a biological sample, and what information each could provide, should be emphasised.

Schedule
11 The Chair reminded the members of the timetable for drafting the discussion paper. Members of the Working Group needed to send their revised draft chapters to the Project Manager by the end of February. Following editing, the draft paper would be distributed to the Group and also to the Council for its meeting on 21st March. A further version would be produced for peer review during April, and a final version discussed at the May meeting. Members were asked to send their ideas for recommendations to the Project Manager for collation and discussion at the March meeting.

Future meetings of the Working Group would take place on 16th March and 22nd May.

Last Updated Wed, 6 June 2007