Week Ten Takeaways

National DNA Registry

• DNA samples vs. DNA profiles: profile is only for identification (string of twenty-six numbers in a specific order) whereas samples (blood, spit, hair, etc...) are biological pieces that can degrade over time and reveal more information
• Collection of a DNA sample NOT a violation of the Fourth Amendment if taken after commitment of a serious crime
• Maryland vs. King: home invasion rape case where semen left at scene was entered in database in 2003, King arrested in 2009 on different assault charges which matched the DNA 
• Taking of a DNA sample deemed equivalent of taking a fingerprint
• DNA sample is a search, but not an unreasonable one
• Public safety outweighs privacy
• Utah's legislation: collection of a DNA sample mandatory for all persons arrested for a felony

Affirmative Blog Post

1. National DNA database would help be beneficial to law enforcement and help fight crime
2. Reduce racial discrimination in DNA database 
1. Law enforcement database currently overwhelming people of color
3. Assist genetic research

Negative Blog Post

1. National DNA registry would be too privacy invasive
1. Violation of the Fourth Amendment
2. Danger of unauthorized access to the database 
3. Too high a risk of errors and misuse/discrimination

Question of the Week

• Majority of class against healthcare providers being able to share patient with other healthcare providers without patient consent 
• Important questions to be addressed for this issue: 
• Definition of healthcare providers: doctors, nurses, specialists, physical therapists, insurance employees
• Type of consent used: express vs implied, informed or not, consent for each specific individual receiving information or for groups
• Purpose of the sharing: research, billing, care of patient
• HIPAA generally prohibits the sharing of personal health information without consent of the patient 

Utah's Genetic Information Privacy Act

• Protects genetic information of Utah residents collected genetic testing companies, such 23andMe
• Companies cannot give consumer genetic information to insurance companies or potential employers
• Requires consumer's express, informed consent for collection and disclosure of their genetic data 
• Consumers have right to request company deletes their genetic data
• No private right of action: attorney general has right to enforce act but not consumer 
• $2500 fine for each violation