#11
|
||||
|
||||
How interesting! I have an album of postcards sent to my great aunt (b1903) from family members and friends all with stamps attached....
Wouldn't it be great to get my grandma's dna tested!
__________________
Sue |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Interesting, but.... what happens to the artifact?
My father wrote a letter to himself in (I think) 1948, describing life then, not to be opened for a number of years. This would be ideal, but.... I've never opened it, never read it. I cannot imagine that I'd get it back intact.
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
DO I NEED TO SEND THE ACTUAL LETTER? No, please do not send the letter, just the envelope. DO I GET MY ITEM BACK? We will return what is left of the item to you when the process is complete. Normally the full flap or stamp/s will be removed. This means there will be some damage to your item. There is a postage cost to return your item to you, which is done via registered post. This cost is available on our buy page.
__________________
KiteRunner Family History News updated 21st May Lancashire Non-conformist records new on Ancestry |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
I had a whole heap of envelopes from relatives to my grandma which I kept for ages for the return addresses. I think I've tossed them though.
One thing though - what about consent? I have letters from my Mum, who is still alive. I could send them in to get her DNA without bothering to ask her her opinion on the test.
__________________
Toni |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
The same laws apply to DNA testing living people without their consent by this method as to any other.
__________________
KiteRunner Family History News updated 21st May Lancashire Non-conformist records new on Ancestry |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
That is good news although I'm still not sure I approve. I mean what if Churchill had skeletons he didn't want made public?
__________________
Toni |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Kit
Everyone loses all their rights once they are dead. Anyone who takes a dna test is, however inadvertently, violating other people's right to privacy. The recent success in catching criminals through dna given by their relatives for family history purposes is an example. OC |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The UK pioneered Familial DNA matching to solve crimes. Only 12 states in the USA allow it. http://www.dnaforensics.com/familialsearches.aspx At the moment it is only used through criminal databases in the UK I believe I.e. if a family member has committed a crime then they will get a partial match with the unsolved DNA profile. I don't have a problem with that, both subjects have committed crimes and therefore the police can retain that DNA. However in the USA a criminal profiler and police uploaded an unknown DNA profile to Gedmatch and got a hit on familial DNA through a family tree and they then caught the Golden State Killer who had murdered 13 people, committed 50 rapes, a 100 burglaries from 1974-1986. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_State_Killer I am not sure I am worried about either method to be honest, if one of my relatives has committed a crime I hope they are caught. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Maggie, no, I'm not worried about serious criminals being caught by this method either, just using it as an example of unconsented(is there such a word?) use of a third party's dna.
OC |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As for the criminal database they need no such permission obviously. |
|
|