Ethical issues abound in forensic science work. To begin with, it is often necessary to use human intervention to reach the “final judgment” when preparing and handling evidence. That means, in effect, that the balance of science is sometimes tipped by living experiences and personal ambitions; when preconceptions inevitably arrive at some point later in this stage yet to come out then scientific judgement in fact turns into an act of words rather than an accurate weighing scale. This can result in insincere science proliferating through junk science, error and political whim to the exclusion of unwelcome truths. A B.Sc in Forensic Science helps students understand their role as ethical forensic scientists.
Challenges of Forensic Science
One big problem is that forensic scientists are under pressure for a definitive conclusion in high profile or time-critical cases. Under such pressures, defendants who are innocent may be wrongfully convicted because their defenders cannot afford professional defense counsel with a cross-examining ability at all effective (which amounts to having no defense of any kind).
If there is pressure to confirm invariably present. Where evidence is carefully interpreted to suit the purposes of our theory (similarities become differences), and even made to fit. This has meant that a decision about despair or truth could sometimes be reached actually on translation of words and without any factual basis at all.
Impact of Technology on Forensic Science
Forensic science has been turned upside down with the advent of modern technologies like genetic genealogy, digital forensics and biometric analysis. Although these technologies solve cold cases and can bring the criminals to justice–they also threaten our privacy and have created concerns of sex misuse too. For example, one would be use of public genetic databases for identifying suspects–such as in the Golden State Killer case. This raises ethical questions: Were people whose DNA was stored on behalf of purposes they had never directly agreed to potentially implicated?
Similarly, the use of digital forensics as extraction software on personal data like call and social media history has complicated ethical debates much more. It is therefore easy to see how many privacy and other human rights will be Plaintive.
So forensic science, when it is as authoritative in the courts as this, means absolutely nothing. Even more dangerous–it is damaging because those who provide the evidence need to be more careful about what evidence they can present to juries, in order to protect people from false conclusions and judgments.
Correlation of Forensic Findings with Other Evidence
At the same time, emphasis on forensic findings can also overshadow investigations. When forensic evidence is viewed as all that matters, other vital pieces of evidence can be ignored such as the testimony of witnesses and investigation will become limited. Further, racial bias in forms of forensic methods like facial recognition and fingerprint testing also adds to inequality which has already become systemic within the system of justice. By lighting the flame for another incident in this series which tortures minorities, it both exacerbates justice provider societal problems too.
Conclusion
Since forensic science is vital to the entire society and affects every area of life, the people who practice it should be true to scientific research methods, and punished for their mistakes. This means that the requirements in this work have to be strict and meticulous in order for fairness to prevail. In truth, this is one of the major obstacles forensic sciences will face next: to defend human rights and produce results which are right.
Explore B.Sc Forensic Science at Sandip University