Compulsory DNA database?

[sejintenej]

Some little time ago the Honourable Minister for Transport (as it was in those days) staggered to his feet in the HoC abds swore blind that never, nohow and under no circumstances would the data on cars held on computer ever be sharewd with any other agency, ministry, police, taxman or whomever. In return Parliament allowed him to put vehicle details on a computer database so that road tax reminders could be sent out more efficiently.

Of course the Dishonourable Minister has been proven to be a liar just as so many ministers have been proven not worthy of the title Honourable.

We have ben promised that NHS data, Ministry of Employment, Taxman data etc is confidential and wil not be divulged. We have discovered that data pertaining to my wife may have ben divulged but the taxman refuses to even acknowledge the loss reported by The Times on the grounds that the individuals contacted don't know and don't know whom to contact.

Whatever promises they offer re a DNA database be assured that one day:
-anyone whose database shows a genetic fault wil be sterilised or merely removed a la Darwin winners
-in the event of a crime anyone with a DNA configuration which might just make them a suspect will be rounded up "for questioning" prior to being charged with wasting Police time
-insurance companies will refuse to insure unless you order the government to hand over their DNA data on you
-employers ditto

[blondie95]

This is a toughie, because as recent high profile cases show to have such a database is a good idea! However thinking about the recent leakings of lost data-is this one not possibly the riskist if 'lost'.

I would have no problem having my dna on it as i have never done anthing to warrent me to be concerned-and if it means that criminals like the ones recently charged with various mruder's can be caught sooner rather than later then maybe its something we would have to live with.

Anyway how many hospitals hold similar indformation

[J.R.]

I have absolutely no problem with the idea of a National DNA Database.................

HOWEVER......................................

Can we really trust our beloved Government with our DNA ?

They seem to be able to lose other personal details on CD's easily enough !

[englishangel]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7267421.stm

[J.R.]

A very interesting BBC article Mary.

I remember, years ago, taking householders/shop-keepers fingerprints for elimination purposes after burglaries etc.

You had the right to ask for their return after the case was closed so you could destroy them yourself.

Hardly anybody ever did ask for them back, and I have no idea exactly what happened to them !

[sejintenej]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7267421.stm

For three months Mr Cann battled to compel police to take his son's DNA sample off the database.

But it was only after his local MP and a national newspaper supported his case that the police agreed to back down and erase the details.

However, a Home Office spokeswoman said innocent people "had nothing to fear" from their DNA details being retained by police.

I think it is a fair bet that the police still have the DNA saample on their record base. Of course by "agreeing to remove it" they stop the pressure.

Where I worked at one time we used to take finger (and especially thumb) prints of half of our banking customers - simply because they were illiterate and that was the only way of authenticating entries on their accounts.
Given the record of schools in this country we will have to start bringing that in here. Even BScs and PhDs of my acquaintance have illegible handwriting thanks to the educational system.

[englishangel]

Even BScs and PhDs of my acquaintance have illegible handwriting thanks to the educational system.

And of course MB.BS and MDs since the dawn of time.

[sejintenej]

Even BScs and PhDs of my acquaintance have illegible handwriting thanks to the educational system.

And of course MB.BS and MDs since the dawn of time.

No, that is self-protection. When the medicine goes wrong they can argue that the pharmacist misread the prescription