Review of Policies of Companies and Databases Regarding Access To Customers’ Genealogy Data for Law Enforcement Purposes

Abstract

The rapidly evolving popularity of direct-to-consumer genetic genealogy companies has made it possible to retrieve genomic information for unintended reasons by third parties, including the emerging use for law enforcement purposes. The question remains whether users of direct-to-consumer genetic genealogy companies and genealogical databases are aware that their genetic and/or genealogical data could be used as means to solving forensic cases. Our review of 22 companies’ and databases’ policies showed that only four companies have provided additional information on how law enforcement agencies should request permission to use their services for law enforcement purposes. Moreover, two databases have adopted a different approach by providing a special service for law enforcement. Although all companies and databases included in the study provide at least some provisions about police access, there is an ongoing debate over the ethics of these practices, and how to balance users’ privacy with law enforcement requests.

Forensic investigation approaches of searching relatives in DNA databases

“…As of 2019, there have been more than 26 million SNP profiles generated by the DTC companies, and the number is increasing [70]. In addition, there are at least 22 individual genealogy databases in the United States and Europe alone [71]. One of the most widely used databases for forensic investigations is GEDMatch, which allows users to voluntarily upload their DNA profiles primarily to find relatives.…”

“…Users may have the option to opt in or out for law enforcement searches, depending on the policies of the databases. A recent review of the policies of 22 genealogy companies and databases showed that only 4 provided their policies on law enforcement agencies access to their services [71]. The limits and consequences of privacy protection are, thus, very different between forensic databases and IGG databases.…”

Long-range familial searches in recreational DNA databases: expansion of affected populations, the participatory turn, and the co-production of biovalue

“…Furthermore, 23andMe, Ancestry, and Helix provide a transparency report in which they summarize all law enforcement and/or governmental requests they received. Among the 22 companies and databases, FamilyTreeDNA and GEDmatch do not require different formal requests to provide information to law enforcement (Skeva, Larmuseau, and Shabani 2020).…”

“…In the absence of legal precedence, companies holding recreational DNA databases, therefore, raise clear questions about accountability, ownership of data, and infringements of citizens' rights. The transnational nature of such databases, as companies provide services in several countries, complicates this scenario even further (Skeva, Larmuseau, and Shabani 2020;Thomson et al 2020). Long-range familial searches in recreational DNA databases are mainly taking place in the USA.…”

“…Nevertheless, this investigative method has captured the interest of other countries. For example, in Sweden, prosecutors have allowed investigators to use consumer genealogy databases to solve cold cases (Skeva, Larmuseau, and Shabani 2020): a missing person and a criminal case that is, at the date of writing, on trial 4 . In Canada (a country that forbids familial searches in forensic DNA databases) two cold cases were also solved through long-range familial searches in recreational DNA databases 5 .…”