• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
One percent

DNA testing of immigrants. Right or wrong?

Recommended Posts

Me personally, I can’t see a problem with it and fail to see why the Home Secretary apologised 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45979359

Home Secretary Sajid Javid has apologised to people who were wrongly forced to take DNA tests to prove they were entitled to settle in the UK.

A Home Office review found there were at least 449 cases where letters had been sent with the demand.

Mr Javid told the House of Commons that some relatives of Gurkhas and Afghan nationals employed by the UK government were among those affected.

It was "unacceptable" and guidance was "unclear or wrong", he said.

The Home Office launched an internal review four months ago after admitting officials wrongly forced immigrants to take DNA tests.

"I want to take this opportunity to apologise to those affected by this practice," Mr Javid told MPs.

"The provision of DNA evidence should always be voluntary and never mandatory."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sarahbell said:


Absolutely. Right. What consequences does that statement have.
 

But, if you want access to another country based solely on your relationship to someone, you should have to prove that you are indeed related 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, One percent said:

But, if you want access to another country based solely on your relationship to someone, you should have to prove that you are indeed related 

Yes you should. absolutely agree.
It's an absolute load of bollocks that will bite him on the arse as well as every future person who wants DNA evidence. 
The home secretary says "loads of shit" but shouldn't be coming out with that sort of crap.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sarahbell said:

Yes you should. absolutely agree.
It's an absolute load of bollocks that will bite him on the arse as well as every future person who wants DNA evidence. 
The home secretary says "loads of shit" but shouldn't be coming out with that sort of crap.

 

Yep.  It’s not as if it’s random.  It’s because they are claiming rights based on relationship to someone who does have rights.  If they are not willing to prove the link, well then no rights should be granted. 

I really fail to see what the problem is. Kind of, my house, my rules...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, swiss_democracy_for_all said:

If you don't have mandatory testing then someone could claim to be the father of the entire population of a village(or something), couldn't they?

 

Posted in another thread that in some villages in  Pakistan they are all ditectly related and in Pakistan as a whole only 6% of couples are unrelated.

So they are the one group who would be largely unaffected by this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have thought it would be quite clear.

You have to prove your case, and you might choose to use DNA testing to help.  So, eg, if you're an adult child of a UK citizen, and this (in the specific situation) means you have the right to reside in the UK, then you might choose DNA to help.  But you might not -- perhaps if you're suspicious that he might not be the dad (mother had an affair while dad was off fighting for the UK) -- in that case you might choose to use other evidence (documentation, family photos, whatever) to make your case.  Importantly, you might want to keep your suspicions of mum's infidelity to yourself, so you might not want to give a reason for refusing DNA testing.  And, just to make it clear, the child of a man who's been brought up by him as his own should have all the legal benefits of this father-son relationship, even if there isn't a biological link.

So, I agree -- DNA testing should be voluntary, not mandatory.

But, as per usual, we've ended up in a mad zone, where some scummy* civil servant has gone all officious (mandatory DNA testing!), ignoring the point/use of the tests, there's been an overreaction from the media, and now we'll end up with no DNA testing even though it would be a useful tool for everyone**.

[* not all civil servants are scummy -- but it does seem to attract the scummy as a profession]

[** except people with something to hide -- who now have carte blanche (or, rather, carte vert)]

Edited by dgul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dgul said:

I'd have thought it would be quite clear.

You have to prove your case, and you might choose to use DNA testing to help.  So, eg, if you're an adult child of a UK citizen, and this (in the specific situation) means you have the right to reside in the UK, then you might choose DNA to help.  But you might not -- perhaps if you're suspicious that he might not be the dad (mother had an affair while dad was off fighting for the UK) -- in that case you might choose to use other evidence (documentation, family photos, whatever) to make your case.  Importantly, you might want to keep your suspicions of mum's infidelity to yourself, so you might not want to give a reason for refusing DNA testing.  And, just to make it clear, the child of a man who's been brought up by him as his own should have all the legal benefits of this father-son relationship, even if there isn't a biological link.

So, I agree -- DNA testing should be voluntary, not mandatory.

But, as per usual, we've ended up in a mad zone, where some scummy* civil servant has gone all officious (mandatory DNA testing!), ignoring the point/use of the tests, there's been an overreaction from the media, and now we'll end up with no DNA testing even though it would be a useful tool for everyone**.

[* not all civil servants are scummy -- but it does seem to attract the scummy as a profession]

[** except people with something to hide -- who now have carte blanche (or, rather, carte vert)]

Excellent post 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, One percent said:

Yep.  It’s not as if it’s random.  It’s because they are claiming rights based on relationship to someone who does have rights.  If they are not willing to prove the link, well then no rights should be granted. 

I really fail to see what the problem is. Kind of, my house, my rules...


Yes if your claim is dependent on something being true, then prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are giving out citizenship and/or equivalent rights we are entitled and correct to demand as many steps as we like. Full health screening (including genetic) should also be carried out to weed out those with serious illness and/or substantial genetic defects. There is no reason why the country should be taking in the poor, weak or otherwise substandard specimens.

We have an absolute right to vet applicants in any way we see fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, One percent said:

But, if you want access to another country based solely on your relationship to someone, you should have to prove that you are indeed related 

I know many adoptive parents that have been far closer relatives to their ‘children’ than the biological sperm donor that begat them. Is their relationship second class?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horrified Onlooker said:

I know many adoptive parents that have been far closer relatives to their ‘children’ than the biological sperm donor that begat them. Is their relationship second class?

That’s not the argument though. It’s concerned with people attempting to get to the uk by claiming to be related to people who already have that right. By saying that dna testing isn’t right it opens the door to anyone just rocking up saying, oh, and I’m related to....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guidelines for screening pregnant women for genetic diseases have changed. Testing is done with every pregnancy,; previously it only needed to be done once.  The mothers genes don't change but there have been cases of relatives turning up in London and pretending to be the pregnant woman.  They have their blood tested instead.

 

Result.....millions of NHS money wasted.   Madness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Or even worse, my latest Ancestry DNA result shows that I'm 20% Scottish or Irish!

And 99% likely to have been responsible for a murder in 1924. Case closed. Thanks for your details. 

27 minutes ago, One percent said:

That’s not the argument though. It’s concerned with people attempting to get to the uk by claiming to be related to people who already have that right. By saying that dna testing isn’t right it opens the door to anyone just rocking up saying, oh, and I’m related to....

Did the people who already have the right refuse to have their teeth examined?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, One percent said:

That’s not the argument though. It’s concerned with people attempting to get to the uk by claiming to be related to people who already have that right. By saying that dna testing isn’t right it opens the door to anyone just rocking up saying, oh, and I’m related to....

So adoptive parents aren’t ‘related’? Not being contentious but it’s about a definition of ‘related’.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horrified Onlooker said:

So adoptive parents aren’t ‘related’? Not being contentious but it’s about a definition of ‘related’.

That’s not the argument though. If someone was claiming rights but adopted, then clearly a dna test isn’t fit for purpose. However, if they claim to be descendants or directly related, then I don’t see what the issue is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.