Advertisement

BioSocieties

pp 1–21 | Cite as

Forensic genetics and the prediction of race: What is the problem?

  • David SkinnerEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

A new wave of innovations in forensics seeks to support criminal investigations by making inferences about the racial or ethnic appearance of as yet unknown suspects using genetic markers of phenotype or ancestry. This paper argues that to grasp fully the potentials of these innovations they must be understood both in the context of established patterns of police–minority relations and as part of significant changes in the use of ‘race’ as an object of knowledge in science, policy, and politics. Socio-technical developments offer new means of identification through geneticisation, datafication, and visualisation and heighten the visibility and valorisation of racial difference. Elements of this are already evident in existing national police forensic DNA databases whose operation, outcomes, and accompanying ethical frames are racialised in varied ways. By openly mobilising race and ethnicity, however, predictive techniques raise new questions about the validity, interpretation, dissemination, and application of results. Examination of existing use by the police and public of suspect descriptions shows the enduring power of common sense visual and linguistic understandings of race and appearance. That very power makes it hard to transition effectively from moments of collective stigmatisation to the identification of individual suspects.

Keywords

Ethnicity Forensic genetics Phenotype prediction Race Racism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my gratitude to Amade M’charek and Peter Wade for providing the context and support vital to the development of this article. I would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers whose insights greatly improved the final result.

References

  1. Aldhous, P. 2014. You dunnit: Reconstructing Faces from DNA Evidence. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  2. Ajana, B. 2013. Governing through biometrics: The biopolitics of identity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amoore, L. 2013. The politics of possibility: Risk and security beyond probability. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Back, L. 2007. The art of listening. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  5. Back, L. 2011. Trust your senses? War, memory, and the racist nervous system. The Senses and Society 6 (3): 306–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beutin, L.P. 2017. Racialization as a way of seeing: the limits of counter-surveillance and Police reform. Surveillance and Society 15 (1): 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Browne, S. 2010. Digital epidermalization: Race, identity and biometrics. Critical Sociology 36 (1): 131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Browne, S. 2015. Dark matters: On the surveillance of blackness. Duke: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chow-White, P.A. 2008. The informationalization of race: Communication technologies and the human genome in the digital age. International Journal of Communication 2: 1168–1194.Google Scholar
  10. Chow-White, P.A. 2009. Data, code, and discourses of difference in genomics. Communication Theory 19 (3): 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chow-White, P.A., and T. Duster. 2011. Do health and forensic DNA databases increase racial disparities? PLoS Medicine 8 (10): e1001100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chow-White, P.A., and S.E. Green. 2013. Data mining in the age of Big Data: Communication and the social shaping of genome technologies from 1998 to 2007. International Journal of Communication 7: 556–583.Google Scholar
  13. Claes, P., D.K. Liberton, K. Daniels, K.M. Rosana, E.E. Quillen, L.N. Pearson, and H. Tang. 2014. Modeling 3D facial shape from DNA. PLoS Genetics 10 (3): e1004224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crawford, N.G., D.E. Kelly, M.E. Hansen, M.H. Beltrame, S. Fan, S.L. Bowman, E. Jewett, A. Ranciaro, S. Thompson, Y. Lo, S.P. Pfeifer. 2017. Loci associated with skin pigmentation identified in African populations. Science 358 (6365): p.eaan8433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duster, T. 2004. Selective arrests an ever-expanding DNA forensic database, and the specter of an early-twenty-first-century equivalent of phrenology. In DNA and the Criminal Justice System, ed. D. Lazer, 315–335. London: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. ECHR. 2016. Healing a Divided Britain: the Need for a Comprehensive Race Equality Strategy Equality and Human Rights Commission Report.Google Scholar
  17. El-Haj, N.A. 2007. The genetic reinscription of race. Annual Review of Anthropology 36: 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Evison, M.P. 2015. The Third Forensics—images and allusions. Policing and Society 25 (5): 521–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferguson, A.G. 2017. The rise of big data policing: Surveillance, race, and the future of law enforcement. New York: New York University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Foster, J. T. Newburn, and A. Souhami, A. 2005. Assessing the impact of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.Google Scholar
  21. Fox, D. 2010. The second generation of racial profiling. Am. J. Crim. L. 38: 49.Google Scholar
  22. Fullwiley, D. 2007. The molecularization of race: Institutionalizing human difference in pharmacogenetics practice. Science as Culture 16 (1): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goldberg, D.T. (2015) Are We Post-Racial Yet? Polity.Google Scholar
  24. Hedgecoe, A. 2009. Bioethics and the reinforcement of socio-technical expectations. Social Studies of Science 40 (2): 163–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hindmarsh R, Prainsack B (eds) (2010) Genetic suspects: Global governance of forensic DNA profiling and databasing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hoeyer, K.L. and Tutton, R. (2005) “Ethics was here”: Studying the language-games of ethics in the case of UK Biobank. Critical Public Health, 15(4):385–397.Google Scholar
  27. Jones, C. (2014). Predictive Policing: Mapping the future of policing, Open Democracy.Google Scholar
  28. Kahn, J. 2008. Race, genes, and justice: A call to reform the presentation of forensic DNA evidence in criminal trials. Brooklyn Law Review 74 (2): 325.Google Scholar
  29. Kahn, J. 2013. Race in a bottle: The Story of BiDil and Racialized Medicine in a post-genomic age. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Kayser, M. 2015. Forensic DNA Phenotyping: Predicting human appearance from crime scene material for investigative purposes. Forensic Science International: Genetics 18: 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kayser, M., and P.M. Schneider. 2009. DNA-based prediction of human externally visible characteristics in forensics: Motivations, scientific challenges, and ethical considerations. Forensic Science International: Genetics 3 (3): 154–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Koops, B.-J., and M. Schellekens. 2008. Forensic DNA phenotyping: Regulatory issues. Science and Technology Law Review 9: 158–202.Google Scholar
  33. Lippert, C., et al. 2017. Identification of individuals by trait prediction using whole-genome sequencing data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences United States of America 114 (38): 10166–10171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leese, M. 2016. ‘Seeing Futures’: Politics of visuality and affect. In Algorithmic life: Calculative devices in the age of big data, ed. L. Amoore and V. Piotukh, 148–164. Milton Park/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Lipphardt, V., A. Lipphardt, N. Buchanan, M. Surdu, V. Toom, M. Wienroth, A.C. Mupepele, C. Cedric Bradbury, and T. Lemke. 2016. Open Letter on critical approaches to Forensic DNA Phenotyping (FDP) and Bio-Geographical Ancestry (BGA), published online 08 Dec 2016.Google Scholar
  36. Lowe, A.L., A. Urquhart, L.A. Foreman, and I.W. Evett. 2001. Inferring ethnic origin by means of an STR profile. Forensic Science International 119: 17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lowe, M.R., A. Stroud, and A. Nguyen. 2017. Who looks suspicious? Racialized surveillance in a predominantly white neighborhood. Social Currents 4 (1): 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mʼcharek, A. 2008. Silent witness, articulate collective: DNA evidence and the inference of visible traits. Bioethics 22 (9): 519–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. M’charek, A., V. Toom, and B. Prainsack. 2012. Bracketing off populations does not advance ethical reflection on EVCs: A reply to Kayser and Schneider. Forensic Science International: Genetics 6 (1): e16–e17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. M'charek, A. 2013. Beyond fact or fiction: On the materiality of race in practice. Cultural Anthropology 28 (3): 420–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. M'charek, A. 2016. Data-Face and ontologies of race. Theorizing the Contemporary, Cultural Anthropology website, https://culanth.org/fieldsights/835-data-face-and-ontologies-of-race. Accessed 24 March 2016.
  42. M’charek, A., K. Schramm, and D. Skinner. 2014. Topologies of race: Doing territory, population and identity in Europe. Science, Technology and Human Values 39 (4): 468–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mackenzie, A., and T. Vurdabrakis. 2011. Codes and coding in crisis: Signification, performativity and excess. Theory, Culture & Society 28 (6): 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McCartney, C. 2006. The DNA expansion programme and criminal investigation. British Journal of Criminology 46 (2): 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Magnet, S.A. 2011. When biometrics fail: Gender, race, and the technology of identity. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Matzner, T. 2016. The model gap: Cognitive systems in security applications and their ethical implications. AI & SOCIETY 31: 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Meer, N. 2014. Key concepts in race and ethnicity. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Muhammad, K.G. 2011. The Condemnation of Blackness. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Nakamura, L. 2008. Digitizing race: Visual cultures of the internet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  50. Nelson, A. 2016. The social life of DNA: Race, reparations, and reconciliation after the genome. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  51. Phillips, C. 2015. Forensic genetic analysis of bio-geographical ancestry. Forensic Science International: Genetics 18: 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Phillips, P.J., F. Jiang, A. Narvekar, J. Ayyad, and A.J. O’Toole. 2011. An other-race effect for face recognition algorithms. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1870076.1870082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pickersgill, M. 2012. The co-production of science, ethics, and emotion. Science, Technology and Human Values 37 (6): 579–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Puwar, N. 2004. Space invaders: Race, gender and bodies out of place. New York: Berg.Google Scholar
  55. Quinton, P. 2015. Race disproportionality and officer decision-making. In Stop and search: The anatomy of a police power, ed. R. Delsol and M. Shiner, 57–78. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reardon, S. 2017. Geneticists pan paper that claims to predict a person’s face from their DNA. Nature 549 (7671): 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Regalado, A. 2017. Does your genome predict your face? Not quite yet. MIT Technology Review.Google Scholar
  58. Reiner, R. 2010. The politics of the police. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Roberts, D. 2011. Collateral consequences, genetic surveillance, and the new biopolitics of race. Howard Law Journal 54: 567–586.Google Scholar
  60. Rowe, M. 2012. Race & crime. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  61. Saldanha, A. 2006. Reontologising race: The machinic geography of phenotype. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24 (1): 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sanders, C.B., and J. Sheptycki. 2017. Policing, crime and ‘big data’; towards a critique of the moral economy of stochastic governance. Crime Law Soc Change 68: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Senker, P. 2010. ‘Forensic DNA phenotyping: Reinforcing race in law enforcement. In What’s the use of race?, ed. I. Whitmarsh and D.S. Jones, 49–62. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  64. Shiner, M. 2010. Post-Lawrence policing in England and Wales: Guilt, innocence and the defence of organizational ego. The British Journal of Criminology 50 (5): 935–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Shiner, M., and R. Delsol. 2015. The politics of the powers. In Stop and Search: The anatomy of a police power, ed. R. Delsol and M. Shiner, 31–56. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Skinner, D. 2012. Mobile identities and fixed categories: Forensic DNA and the politics of racialized data. In Identitypolitics and the new genetics: Re/Creating categories of difference and belonging, eds. K. Schramm, D. Skinner, R. Rottenberg, 53–78. Oxford: Berghan.Google Scholar
  67. Skinner, D. 2013. ‘The NDNAD has no ability to be discriminatory’: Ethnicity and the governance of the UK National DNA Database. Sociology 47 (5): 976–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Skinner, D. 2014. Beyond Whac-a-Mole? Rethinking ‘race’ in social studies of genetics. New Genetics & Society 33 (4): 450–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Smith, G. 2015. Opening the black box: The work of watching. Abingdon Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Song, M. 2014. Challenging a culture of racial equivalence. British Journal of Sociology 65 (1): 107–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Staubach et al. 2017. Letter Nature 545:30.Google Scholar
  72. Toom, V., M. Wienroth, A. M’charek, B. Prainsack, R. Williams, T. Duster, T. Heinemann, C. Kruse, H. Machado, and E. Murphy. 2016. Approaching ethical, legal and social issues of emerging forensic DNA, phenotyping (FDP) technologies comprehensively: Reply to ‘Forensic DNA phenotyping: Predicting human appearance from crime scene material for investigative purposes’ by Manfred Kayser. Forensic Science International: Genetics 22: e1–e4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tyler, K. 2018. A new research agenda for the study of genetic ancestry tests and the formation of racial and ethnic Identities and ancestries. Genealogy.  https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy2010001.Google Scholar
  74. Tutton, R., C. Hauskeller, and S. Sturdy. 2014. Suspect technologies: Forensic testing of asylum seekers at the UK border. Ethnic and Racial Studies 37 (5): 738–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Vailly, J. 2017. The politics of suspects’ geo-genetic origin in France: The conditions, expression, and effects of problematisation. BioSocieties 12 (1): 66–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Washington, H.A. 2010. Base assumptions? Racial aspects of US DNA forensics. In Genetic suspects: Global governance of forensic DNA profiling and databasing, ed. R. Hindmarsh and B. Prainsack, 131–152. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Wienroth, M. 2018. Governing anticipatory technology practices. Forensic DNA phenotyping and the forensic genetics community in Europe, New Genetics and Society 37 (2): 137–152.Google Scholar
  78. Wienroth, M., N. Morling, and R. Williams. 2014. Technological innovations in forensic genetics: social, legal and ethical aspects. Recent Advances in DNA & Gene Sequences 8 (2): 98–103.Google Scholar
  79. Williams, R. 2010. DNA Databases and the Forensic Imaginary. In Genetic suspects: Global governance of forensic DNA profiling and databasing, ed. R. Hindmarsh and B. Prainsack, 131–152. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Williams, R., and M. Wienroth. 2014. Ethical, social and policy aspects of forensic genetics: A systematic review. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Humanities and Social SciencesAnglia Ruskin UniversityCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations