- What should Mark do?
Mark, confronted with such situation, should voluntarily head to the premises where the DNA samples are being collected and, willingly, give his contribution with his blood and DNA to the authorities and the case, reinforcing his innocence and, thus, his will to participate positively.
- If Mark does not volunteer.
If Mark does not volunteer and doesn’t provide with his DNA sample to the authorities, these may become suspicious on the authorities’ eyes, wondering why Mark has refused to do such voluntary action and what reasons could have kept him from wanting, willingly, to provide with his blood and DNA sample; this way, it is probable that they might investigate and, if required or found important for the case (and proved so), approach/contact Mark about it, bringing further attention to him, which Mark would not want in the first place, because of the latent possible negative effect on him and/or surrounding context.
- Can authorities force Mark?
If the authorities find it to be important and if they can establish a probable cause for Mark’s refusal, they can force Mark to provide with the DNA sample, by presenting a warrant for it, when they reach him. This way, even not wanting to, Mark will have to participate and will be forced to give blood for DNA sample. Such situations would be even less desirable.
- Why this technique works better in the UK than in the USA.
Applying this technique seems to work better in the UK than in the USA, because in the USA there are very controversial debates, where there are factions that defend that these procedures are invasive to one’s right to their privacy, violating the core of the 4th Amendment. This violation, in the USA is seen both as subjecting innocent people to be summoned for DNA collection, exposing them to possible discrimination because of such summon, and by keeping the samples in a database, which may allow access to personal information even after a specific case is solved, which also implies invasion of personal space. Furthermore, since there are pre-conceptions about certain ethnicities and relation to higher rates of criminal activity, it is also defended that these actions might become an excuse to keep such prejudice alive.
- DNA from girls, because of abandoned baby.
In this procedure, the collection of DNA from the girls should be done only after the authorities have established and demonstrated the existence of probable cause. The simple suspicion of these girls, because of their absence in school as might being related to such case is simply not enough for the authorities to undergo a legal collection of DNA samples.
- Possibility of refusal in a “voluntary” action.
If one does not want to provide with the DNA sample, he/she can refuse it, because of having the right and freedom to do so. One should, however, still approach the authorities to express such, along with the motives for not wanting to enroll voluntarily in the DNA collection and ask for a lawyer to talk about the consequences of the refusal.
Of course, this will draw the attention of the authorities to the person that is refusing, asking themselves why is that person refusing and wondering/suspecting about the motives. It may become subject of further investigation, to confirm if that person might have any relation with the situation, which may easily become an attention that the person would not want either. But, even so, regarding the question issue, yes, one can refuse to participate voluntarily in such actions, because of one’s right for privacy.
References
Council for Responsible Genetics. “Forensic DNA Collection: A Citizen’s Guide To Your Rights, Scenarios and Responses”. Cambridge, n.d. 21st of February 2013.
Fernandez, Holly K. . “Genetic Privacy, Abandonment, and DNA Dragnets: Is Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence Adequate?”. Hastings Center Report, Januray-February 2005, 21st of February 2013.
Hays, Dustin, Katsanis, Sara. “DNA, Forensics and the Law”. Genetics & Public Policy Center, August 2008. 21st of February 2013.
