Wednesday, September 23, 2015

DNA Technology can be a tool in Post-Conflict Regions

             To Know Where He Lies continues into more depth on the exact nature of the effort to identify the mortal remains of those killed in the genocide at Srebrenica. The author, Sarah Wagner explores the theme of science as it relates to a social project and the role DNA technology played in this project. In Chapters 3 through 5, she outlines how the efforts of the Red Cross, ICMP, and other related groups progressed from more anthropological attempts to identify the bodies to DNA-based approach. At first, evidence was amassed by collecting lists of names, anecdotal accounts and descriptions of the missing on the ante mortem end, while trying to correlate those stories with the postmortem evidence from remains and the objects collected with them. This method proved to be slow going, and rarely successful. DNA technology was employed only as a way of confirming or disproving conjectures. However, when they realized this technique wasn’t getting them anywhere, they switched to a more DNA-based approach and found more success though the process was still difficult. Obstacles included the resistance of many of the relatives to DNA technology, which hindered the procurement of blood samples for comparison, and other cooperative efforts. Wagner highlights how foreign and unrelated all these scientific explanations must have seemed to the relatives of the missing. To them, the anthropological efforts made much more sense. But Wagner does not discount the value of this memory-based evidence, which was used to corroborate DNA evidence, and in some cases, served to make identifications on its own. What’s more, it provided some level of comfort to the families, in providing them with artifacts from their dead loved ones. Still, there were some difficulties to this method as well, including the fallibility of memory. Moreover, throughout this whole process, it has to be remembered that often the end result of these scientific investigations was unwelcome news. The caseworkers had to not only be scientists or forensic anthropologists; they also had to navigate delicate social situations. Looming in the background of Wagner’s book is the horrors of the genocide, and its own relation to science. The method of digging up bodies and moving them to secondary mass graves to be brutalized is described in chilling, scientific terms. At times, Wagner uses this to contrast the dehumanizing actions of the genocide with the humanizing capabilities DNA technology has in this project. At other times, she makes DNA technology also seem dehumanizing in its reduction of humans to numbers and its distance from the actual affected people.
In Chapter 7, Wagner takes a step back and looks at the larger impact of the Bosnian project. The ICMP’s expertise was called upon again to assist in body identification after the tragedies of 9/11, the 2004 tsunami, and Hurricane Katrina. She also places the project within the historical context of previous South American body identification efforts. Finally, she moves on to why governments and international agencies would even go through all this effort and expense. She offers humanitarian explanations, but seems to side more with the argument that practical considerations motivate governments. These considerations include not just pleasing the public, but also accumulating evidence, and exercising control over an uncontrollable situation.

Overall, Wagner seems to have mostly positive feelings towards the implementation of DNA technology in post-conflict situations, but remains a skeptical eye, always keeping in mind of how scientific distance can ultimately be dehumanizing to the very people it is trying to help.

No comments:

Post a Comment