Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanzler
(Post 10075098)
Is this an issue? In that case you would still want to minimize the extent of this information being used - assuming that you are collecting the DNA, you ought to use the information simply to match the parents with the children and not leave a permanent record that persists beyond the purpose that the information is being obtained for. It doesn't mean you create a database that keeps this private information potentially indefinitely with a loose scope for its use. And besides, what is sufficient kinship? What of distant cousins or adopted children?
|
If you want I can dig up the articles in the thread, but yes it is a fairly large issue. The use of a database I believe from reading the article is to have it crosschecked with repeat criminal offenders who are attempting to get back into the country as well.
As for kinship, I believe under the Flores Agreement, its based on immediate family, although I am not sure. As for adopted children, again that gets back to buying children illegally, and would probably require the parent to provide proper paperwork from their home country showing the adoption was legal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanzler
(Post 10075098)
Even if you asked for the person's consent, it wouldn't make it right. There must be some kind of risk that you are managing in order to ask for someone to give up their information like that. I don't know what an asylum seeker has done to have them give up their DNA information that an immigrant from a traditional channel has not. You could make the same comparison to an American citizen. Those asylum seekers that become US citizens will always have their DNA information in a database somewhere which means they would never appreciate the privilege to have such information kept private to themselves. I think governments have no business asking for information of this kind from people who have done nothing wrong. What about the asylum seeker requires for you to take their DNA?
|
The high recidivism rate of those deported, along with the current trend to buy children seems to show a clear risk in letting people in that have not been properly established as to who they are and who they belong to. Mind you as a asylum seeker their information is going to be in a database, their picture, finger prints, name, all information given that they filled out, information provided by their home, etc etc, is going to be in a database, how is DNA any different?
Also and this is the most important point of all, these people are asking to enter the US, many times from some of the most dangerous countries in the world with very little information about their past history. How should they expect any amount of privacy when the Government is going to do everything possible to establish the identities of these people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanzler
(Post 10075098)
I don't agree with having DNA testing, but if I did, I would still require that the information only be used for the purpose intended and discarded after. For example, you could take someone's DNA and check it against a criminal database, and once that was cleared the sample and all records of the DNA it should be destroyed. If there is a record remaining it should just be a record that they passed or failed the check.
|
And lets say they are subsequently refused asylum, and deported, five months later they are caught trying to cross the border again and claim asylum, what is the problem with having a profiling system in place for all of those who attempt to gain asylum or enter the country illegally?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanzler
(Post 10075098)
All of this talk is pointless without discussion of the capabilities and limits of DNA testing and checking, however. It's not a perfect technology, and if you use it on everybody you will inevitably get false positives. And for what purposes would you propose for DNA testing to be used? How long should the information be kept for? My understanding is that it's not very American to take people's information first and ask questions later. Privacy was once upon a time respected in society.
|
I would say keep a national database for as long as the person remains alive, I cannot see the difference between this, and all the other checks we maintain on people who enter the country claiming asylum. How is having a DNA database any different than having a database with a person's picture in it, or fingerprints?