Who’s your Mama?: Using Race to Redefine mtDNA Populations
Ruqaillah Yearby – Tarrytown 2011
Texas supplied approximately 800 newborn heel blood samples to the U.S. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology’s mtDNA registry. Texas is not the only state that sent samples to the U.S. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology’s mtDNA registry, but it is unclear which other states sent samples.
The registry is supposed to be used for three purposes: 1) identify unidentified bodies; 2) solve unsolved crimes; and 3) serve as a basis for an international terrorism registry. Arguably, mtDNA can be a way to define populations by linking the data to maternal information. According to the Army researchers, "[t]he high-quality mtDNA data generated from the registry will be publicly available to permit examination of regional mtDNA sub-structure and admixture, and ultimately to improve our ability to interpret mtDNA evidence."
What will the mtDNA data be used for? In DNA forensics, it is a valuable source of DNA when recovered from damaged, degraded or very small samples of DNA. mtDNA is used to pull DNA from these samples because there are hundreds of copies of mtDNA in a cell compared to 2 copies of DNA per cell. Unlike DNA it is not as informative because it does not provide individual information. However, when linked with a reference sample from a maternal relative it can provide information about an individual. In fact, it has already been used in several criminal cases as evidence and to identify serial killer victims.
What is the harm? There are several problems with this practice of sending mtDNA data to the registry including but not limited to the fact that the parents never consented. This is even more important than sending the children's DNA because allegedly mtDNA includes maternal information. Thus, consent should have been obtained from the mother because her genetic information is being recorded.
Additionally, if parents are going to consent there is no reason that racial data should be linked to the blood. Although, the data supposedly was de-identified, i.e. no names, it still contained racial identifiers, hospital information, and parental information such as education, age and class. Because mtDNA includes maternal information and thus population information, there is no need for racial identifiers. The linkage of race to mtDNA perpetuates the belief that race is biological and even more important than biological information, i.e. mtDNA data.
For example, the researchers stated that "[i]n addition to providing high-quality reference data for the forensic community, we also hope to use these data to better understand the magnitude and significance of mtDNA variation among regional sub-populations (i.e. racial groups)... However, for many populations, the extent of inter-population, or regional sub-population, differentiation is not well understood simply because it has not yet been thoroughly examined. With diverse regional population sampling, particularly of component U.S. populations, we hope to study this issue in order to better understand the level at which separate mtDNA reference databases should be maintained for U.S. populations." Thus, the researchers are using race to define sub-populations even though they admit that racial identifiers are not biologically based.
"A preliminary analysis of 853 U.S. ‘‘Hispanics'', representing five regional sub-samples sequenced over the past 2 years, shows significant differences... While 39% of New York ‘‘Hispanics'' exhibit African mtDNA haplotypes, only 5% and 1% of ‘‘Hispanics'' from California (Orange County) and Texas, respectively, reflect African-derived lineages". Even though the researchers admit that the term ‘"'Hispanic' does not refer to a real population in the biological sense," they continue to use race to define populations and state that they will continue to collect data using racial identifiers as a way to differentiate mtDNA samples instead of reviewing the samples for differences.
What is the answer? I propose working on model legislation to be adopted by all states. The model state legislation would allow opt-out pediatric screening and require consent for continued storage and use for research. Furthermore, it should prevent the use of the information for criminal or terrorism purposes.
The model legislation should also include a provision barring the inclusion of racial data. Racial identifiers corrupt the data. If the key of the mtDNA data is to determine biological differences then the only information that is necessary is the data not identifiers. The data can be collected using race information to ensure that all races are included in the data submitted; however, once received the