Genetic Information Should NOT Be Relevant In Criminal Cases

The genetic make-up of individuals differs from one person to the next. However, are some individuals or groups of people more predisposed to crime than others? If so, when they act based on these factors, such as genetics which are arguably outside of their control -- should they be held accountable to the same degree as everyone else? Ultimately, we live in a society where actions should be the principal factor considered in criminal behavior. It is unfortunate for those who may be more prone to act out violently or impulsively, but in order to maintain some level of freedom and equality, whilst protecting our civil liberties, genetic information should not be relevant in criminal cases, unless it is to tie an individual to a particular crime. However, maintaining records and tracking those found to carry “violent” genes, is acceptable for those who have a history and …show more content…
It could help to shed light on the logic (or lack thereof), impulsivity, and the aggression behind their actions, but it should not be a relevant factor to dismiss their criminal behavior. We live in a society where one is held responsible for their actions, regardless of the circumstances. However, it could be appropriate for the judge to use this information as a mitigating factor to determine proper sentencing. There are undoubtedly “variants that have been linked to a propensity for violence, aggression, psychopathy, or psychiatric disorders,” (Hughes, 2014) and this would certainly be something for a judge to consider in determining his verdict, but not for jurors to determine guilt. Such evidence should be withheld from juries as this could influence their decision, and essentially change the outcome of the case by pushing their own personal beliefs or through sympathizing with the