 CBS News reported Tuesday that police in Milledgeville, GA have requested DNA samples from Ben Roethlisberger in connection with assault allegations. Sexual assault cases use DNA testing extremely often to determine if the assailant and victim had contact.
It will be interesting to see whether Roethlisberger admits or denies sexual contact with the 20-year old college student. According to the CBS article, the woman went to police immediately following the incident. That gives police the highest possible probability of obtaining DNA evidence linking Roethlisberger.
The police department is analyzing security videos and using eye-witness testimony to get to the truth, but DNA evidence could be a deciding factor. DNA testing turns assault cases from a he said/she said into a case of facts.
Stay tuned to find out if forensic DNA is used as the basis for charges being filed against Big Ben.
The AP reported today that scientists in Rome are attempting to gain clearance into Leonardo Da Vinci’s alleged burial site. The purpose is to perform carbon and DNA testing to determine two things:
1. If the body is that of Da Vinci
2. If the Mona Lisa is a self portrait
Wow.
I don’t think exhuming a body that has been buried for almost 500 years will provide any evidence to support either of their goals. The likelihood of obtaining DNA is EXTREMELY rare. The best place to check would be a molar or femur. The DNA is likely degraded by now. Even if they do get a DNA sample, what will they compare it to? Without a known Da Vinci reference sample there’s nothing they can do to identify him using DNA.
On to goal number 2. These scientists think they can reconstruct Da Vinci’s bone structure using the remains, and figure out if the Mona Lisa is actually a self portrait.
My suggestion: Look at some actual portraits of Da Vinci.
Leave the guy alone.
 The USCIS has decided to change procedures in many of the foreign countries who suggest DNA testing for family based immigration cases.
In the past, U.S. DNA labs have sent testing supplies to physicians, who are authorized by the U.S. Embassy to perform DNA collections. In a slow moving process, U.S. Embassies across the globe are beginning to perform DNA collections at the Embassy itself, essentially cutting the physicians out of the loop.
This has caused significant delays in the DNA testing process for many families trying to immigrate to the U.S. We’ve noticed about 3 month delays with most countries making the transition. In addition, U.S. Embassies are not as equipped for DNA testing as the physicians.
For example, the Clinica Abreu, an authorized collection facility in the Dominican Rebublic, could handle more than 25 DNA cases each day. Now that testing has moved to the Embassy, DNA test appointments are limited to 10 cases.
The purpose of this change is to prevent any potential fraud. Although this may be effective at preventing this fraud, it is also creating a large time delay for many families who have been waiting years to see their loved ones.
View the immigration DNA testing procedures.
Evidence is coming out that DNA testing is sometimes wrong. What is considered by most people in the general public to be foolproof, DNA test results are assisting in the wrongful convictions of innocent citizens and contributing to child support payments for men who are not biological fathers. There are two reasons for bad DNA testing results; poor testing methods and poor interpretation.
60 minutes reported on a man who was wrongly convicted of rape and sentenced to 25 years in prison. The Houston crime lab said his DNA profile matched that of an evidence sample found at the crime scene. It turns out the profiles didn’t match at all. The test results were interpreted wrong.
DNA testing results show a series of peaks, which need to be interpreted manually by a trained scientist. The machines that produce the data do not produce the final results. When you get a scientist who is undertrained or under the watchful eye of biased parties, it’s easy to get wrong results.
Cross contamination can occur during evidence collection or DNA testing. This is another leading cause of poor results. Evidence samples mix with reference samples or other evidence samples. It ruins the whole test.
Laboratories have been knows to mix standard paternity testing samples in child support cases, leading to false exclusions. Again, data can be interpreted wrong and produce a false inclusion.
In any regard, it’s of utmost importance to check the qualifications and methods of any DNA testing laboratory you choose to use for testing. There are plenty of reputable labs out there. There are also plenty of labs like Houston.
I read an Associated Press article today, posted on miamiherald.com called, “Lugo accepts DNA test for third paternity claim”. Until recent years, paternity suits have had a stereotype of being delegated only to middle or lower class families, and are associated with the terms “child support” and “deadbeat dad”. A list of recent paternity suits that have reached the public eye has changed all that. Take the following list of names I pulled off the top of my head:
- Keanu Reeves
- Jude Law
- Eddie Murphy
- John Edwards
- Larry Birkhead
For a longer list, check out this celebrity paternity cases article. You’ll see that this has been happening for a long time.
The DNA test being required of Paraguay President Lugo is more surprising, however than all these others. At least to me. The AP reported that Lugo is a former priest, who resigned in only 2004 to get into politics. Talk about a mid-life crisis. This paternity suit is actually Lugo’s third. The first occurred while he was bishop of San Pedro. Now, I don’t know all the rules of being a bishop, so I won’t make any snap judgments to this claim. I don’t believe these claims have been substantiated.
This leads me to my point that many of these celebrities are being thrust into the negative light of paternity suits for many reasons. Some, maybe Lugo, because they actually fathered children to women who either want financial support or a father figure for the child, or both. Others, like Keanu, were targeted purely for financial reasons (the DNA test showed he did not father any of the woman’s 4 children).
What I’m getting at is paternity suits and DNA tests are not restricted to the lower class. U.S. DNA labs tested over 300,000 samples in 2007, the last reported year. That number is expected to grow.
In any case, these matters should remain out of the public eye. They should be kept behind closed courtroom doors to be worked out between the parties involved. I say this as I feed the media frenzy with my blog post. I suppose I am as anxious as anyone to see how Lugo’s DNA test results come out. At least he’s not going on Maury.
Reuters reported yesterday that the U.S. will implement strict DNA Testing guidelines for Guatemala Adoption cases, due to an increase in child trafficking. In the past, Guatemala has been a huge source of child adoptions by U.S. citizens. More recently, adoptions have been ceased because of child trafficking and fraud. DNA testing guidelin es will be a large step in curtailing this problem.
According to adoption.com, DNA testing must be completed prior to adoption approval by a company authorized by the U.S. A maternity test will be completed between the mother and child being put up for adoption.
The second phase of DNA testing comes when the child arrives in the U.S. A DNA sample must be taken from the child and compared with the DNA profile from the first test to ensure that the child has not been switched.
Although painful for U.S. families trying to adopt and the attorneys going though the steps to help them, DNA testing seems necessary to prevent child trafficking. Families spend upwards of $50,000 to adopt a child from Guatemala. $1000 to complete DNA testing in order to make sure the child is willingly being given up by the mother seems like a small price to pay.
Be on the lookout for more posts about the procedures for completing DNA testing for Guatemala adoptions.
 According to AP article, “US mulls DNA tests for some refugees”, the Obama administration is considering restarting a program it implemented in 2007 which required DNA testing for some refugee applicants. This could affect a large number of new I-730 petitions.
The original program in 2007 asked thousands of African refugees to prove relatedness to their family members in the U.S. According to the program results, only 20% of Kenyan cases were able to prove relationships.
The USCIS already requests immigration DNA testing for many family based I-130 petitions. If families are not able to prove relatedness using primary documentation such as birth certificates, or if the immigration officer suspects fraud for a different reason, then DNA testing is requested.
This brings into question the cultural differences in relatedness. While U.S. citizens see only biological relatives as brothers or sisters, it is not always the same in other nations. The issue of cultural difference is resolved with the U.S. immigration rules and regulations for family-based petitions. Rules clearly explain that petitioners and beneficiaries must be biologically related.
DNA testing for refugees, if implemented, will require petitioners to have their DNA collected in the U.S. and the refugee or asylee to be collected at the U.S. Embassy overseas. This testing process must be facilitated by an accredited DNA testing company in the U.S.
In essence, DNA testing for refugees will help enforce immigration law, and it is likely to dishearten many refugee families at the same time.
Picture Credit: Center For Refugee Studies
 A CBS News Blog on Friday reported that the University of Akron will require all employees, staff, and contractors to submit DNA samples to university officials. Background checks and drug screens are common place employment practices, but never before has an employer required employees to give a DNA sample. There’s been some kickback from some staff members.
The theory behind DNA sample submissions makes sense. If there is ever a crime committed, the school can use the samples on file to eliminate potential suspects. It seems easier to collect samples before anything goes wrong, than to ask someone for a sample after a crime is committed. DNA sample submissions also act as a crime deterrent. If you knew your employer had your DNA on file, would you still commit a crime? I can see why the University wants this to happen.
However, after reading the school’s policy on the issue, it looks like they are only using the DNA samples to compare them to the federal CODIS database as part of the criminal background check. This would require the university to process each of the samples in a laboratory, instead of just keeping the swabs in a filing cabinet in case of emergency.
So, should this policy be allowed? Is it too invasive? Does it violate a person’s right to privacy? These questions are all up for debate.
School officials claim the policy violates a federal law which goes into effect on November 21st called the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).
A university spokesperson stated that the DNA sample submission is not required. Employees are free to seek employment elsewhere.
A growing concern among U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents who are petitioning loved ones from overseas is the issue of waiting times. Family-based immigration has become bogged down by excessive waiting time and country quotas which exacerbate those wait times.
According to the U.S. Visa Bulletin, U.S. citizens are entitled to apply for visas for spouses, children, and parents without regard to overall caps, but other close family members, including children over the age of 21, must wait years to reunite with loved ones. For example, an immigrant residing in the United States legally with a green card must currently wait at least five years to receive a green card for her minor child. A naturalized U.S. citizen from the Philippines must wait over 20 years before obtaining a green card for a brother or sister.
At the final interview, beneficiaries must show proof that they are biologically related to the petitioner. Primary and secondary evidence include birth records, photographs, insurance receipts, and anything else that offers proof. If primary and secondary evidence are not sufficient, then immigration officials will recommend DNA testing. If you speak with a qualified immigration attorney, they will tell you that certain factors increase your probability of needing a DNA test. Most factors involve issues with birth certificates or legal names.
If you suspect needing a DNA test for immigration you can start the process before the Embassy requests it. This way, when they do ask for it you already have the results you are looking for. This could save you 1-6 months of processing. This is not a ton of time relative to the 20 years it takes a Filipino to be reunited with her brother, but every second counts when you are trying to be together with your family.
 After more than a three month pause of all DNA testing activities in Accra, Ghana, the U.S. Embassy has announced that it is resuming testing. Prior to the pause, testing was completed at MedLab, an Embassy authorized collection clinic in Accra. From now on, all DNA test collections will be completed directly at the U.S. Embassy.
If you are one of the hundreds of families who started a DNA test with a laboratory during the pause, the Embassy has announced all beneficiaries should be receiving phone calls to schedule appointments this fall.
The Embassy also announced that DNA testing is only used when other forms of evidence are not sufficient to prove a biological relationship between the petitioner and beneficiary. The Embassy in Ghana does not accept walk-ins for DNA sample collection.
Once a DNA collection is scheduled for the beneficiary the case should be near completion. The beneficiary should bring a passport as well as two photos to the DNA sample collection appointment.
For more information about immigration DNA testing in Ghana, contact a DNA case manager.
|
