In a recent special issue of the journal on new trends in forensic genetics, Manfred Kayser contributed a review of developments, opportunities and challenges of forensic DNA phenotyping (FDP). In his article he argues that FDP technologies - such as determining eye, hair and skin color - should be considered as akin to a "biological witness" with the potential of providing more accurate information than traditional eye witnesses

This scoping review examines the research landscape about publics’ views on the ethical challenges of AI. To elucidate how the concerns voiced by the publics are translated within the research domain, this study scrutinizes 64 publications sourced from PubMed^® and Web of Science™. The central inquiry revolves around discerning the motivations, stakeholders, and ethical quandaries that emerge in research on this topic. The analysis reveals that innovation and legitimation stand out as the primary impetuses for engaging the public in deliberations concerning the ethical dilemmas associated with AI technologies. Supplementary motives are rooted in educational endeavors, democratization initiatives, and inspirational pursuits, whereas politicization emerges as a comparatively infrequent incentive. The study participants predominantly comprise the general public and professional groups, followed by AI system developers, industry and business managers, students, scholars, consumers, and policymakers. The ethical dimensions most commonly explored in the literature encompass human agency and oversight, followed by issues centered on privacy and data governance. Conversely, topics related to diversity, nondiscrimination, fairness, societal and environmental well-being, technical robustness, safety, transparency, and accountability receive comparatively less attention. This paper delineates the concrete operationalization of calls for public involvement in AI governance within the research sphere. It underscores the intricate interplay between ethical concerns, public involvement, and societal structures, including political and economic agendas, which serve to bolster technical proficiency and affirm the legitimacy of AI development in accordance with the institutional norms that underlie responsible research practices.

The extraordinary media coverage regarding the disappearance of the British 3-year-old Madeleine McCann emerges as an illustrative example of a ‘public drama’ and ‘trial by media’. This article presents a comparative analysis of the perspectives and narrative devices employed by two Portuguese newspapers in establishing a dialogue with their respective audiences. High-profile mediatized criminal cases have the potential to linger in the public memory and become cultural references which may affect long-term public representations of crime and justice. Our analysis is limited to a sample of representative Portuguese newspapers. We found a basic distinction between ‘quality’ and ‘popular’ press which may be related to inherent differences of their market and implicit audiences. A distanced, neutral and reflexive style of the quality press contrasts with the construction of a sensationalistic narrative by the popular press. The latter provided the audience with a daily dose of vicarious participation in a criminal drama which developed into a trial by media, sustained by a rhetoric that encourages the audience to ‘take sides’. Sensationalist media narratives can potentially undermine the principles of fair trial and the presumption of innocence. But they can also elicit relevant collective energies directed at starting processes of change.

The political and financial investments in the implementation of forensic DNA databases and the ethical issues related to their use and expansion justify inquiries into their performance and general utility. The main function of a forensic DNA database is to produce matches between individuals and crime scene stains, which requires a constant input of individual profiles and crime scene stains. This is conditioned, among other factors, by the legislation, namely the criteria for inclusion of profiles and the periods of time and conditions for their retention and/or deletion. This article aims to provide an overview of the different legislative models for DNA databasing in Europe and ponder if wider inclusion criteria – and, consequently, database size – translates into more matches between profiles of crime scene stains and included individuals (performance ratio). The legislation governing forensic DNA databases in 22 countries in the European Union was analysed in order to propose a typology of two major groups of legislative criteria for inclusion/retention of profiles that can be classified as having either expansive effects or restrictive effects. We argue that expansive criteria for inclusion and retention of profiles do not necessarily translate into significant gains in output performance.

Forensic DNA testing is a powerful tool used to identify, convict, and exonerate individuals charged of criminal offenses, but there are different views on its benefits and risks. Knowledge about public views on forensic DNA testing applied in the criminal field is socially valuable to practitioners and policymakers. This paper aims to synthesize quantitative evidence about the factors that influence public views on forensic DNA testing in the criminal field. Based on a systematic search conducted in January 2019, a scoping review was performed, targeting studies presenting original empirical data that were indexed in Web of Science and PubMed. The two authors performed eligibility and data extraction. The 11 studies were conducted mainly in European countries (Italy, Portugal, Serbia, Spain, Switzerland) and the remaining derived from the USA and New Zealand. Non-representative samples were mostly used to explore the benefits and risks of criminal DNA databases, criteria for insertion and retention of DNA samples and profiles, knowledge, willingness to donate a DNA sample, and custody. The value of forensic DNA databases in protecting society from crime was emphasized. Concerns about improper access to forensic genetic data and risks to civil liberties associated with its uses were expressed. The scarce literature on Forensic DNA Phenotyping and familial searching revealed the same trend of positively valuing forensic DNA testing. Only factors related with socioeconomic position were assessed by more than two studies. Results suggested that public views on forensic DNA testing are influenced by the level of education, age, and exposure to law enforcement occupations although not in a straightforward manner. Further empirical research should assess standardized factors related with social and structural levels (e.g., scientific literacy, public trust in the justice system and concerns about victimization or police activity) and be performed in different national jurisdictions to enable generalization and comparison of findings. It is needed to expand empirical studies on public views about the commercialization of forensic science and the use of recent controversial techniques and new transparency and accountability models.

Systematic knowledge on the factors that influence the decisions of IVF users regarding embryo donation for research is a core need for patient-centred policies and ethics in clinical practice. However, no systematic review has been provided on the motivations of patients who must decide embryo disposition. This paper fills this gap, presenting a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies, which synthesizes the current body of knowledge on the factors and reasons associated with IVF patients' decisions to donate or not to donate embryos for research. A systematic search of studies indexed in PubMed, ISI WoK and PsycINFO, published before November 2013, was conducted. Only empirical, peer-reviewed, full-length, original studies reporting data on factors and reasons associated with the decision concerning donation or non-donation of embryos for research were included. Eligibility and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers and disagreements were resolved by discussion or a third reviewer, if required. The main quantitative findings were extracted and synthesized and qualitative data were assessed by thematic content analysis. A total of 39 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. More than half of the studies (n = 21) used a quantitative methodology, and the remaining were qualitative (n = 15) or mixed-methods (n = 3) studies. The studies were derived mainly from European countries (n = 18) and the USA (n = 11). The proportion of IVF users who donated embryos for research varied from 7% in a study in France to 73% in a Swiss study. Those who donate embryos for research reported feelings of reciprocity towards science and medicine, positive views of research and high levels of trust in the medical system. They described their decision as better than the destruction of embryos and as an opportunity to help others or to improve health and IVF treatments. The perception of risks, the lack of information concerning research projects and the medical system and the conceptualization of embryos in terms of personhood were the most relevant motives for not donating embryos for research. Results relating to the influence of sociodemographic characteristics and reproductive and gynaecological history were mostly inconclusive. Three iterative and dynamic dimensions of the IVF patients' decision to donate or not to donate embryos for research emerged from this review: the hierarquization of the possible options regarding embryo disposition, according to the moral, social and instrumental status attributed to embryos; patients' understanding of expectations and risks of the research on human embryos; and patients' experiences of information exchange and levels of trust in the medical-scientific institutions.