If You Don’t Want to Deal with Family Skeletons, Don’t Look in the DNA Closet
Amy Dickinson is an American newspaper columnist who writes the syndicated advice column Ask Amy. In a recent column, she published a letter from a reader asking how to handle a family surprise: upon having her DNA tested, the writer discovered she had a half-sibling that she was not aware of previously. She then shared this bit of information with her family, including with both of her parents.The information was not well received.
You can read this rather interesting letter and Amy Dickinson’s advice in a number of newspapers, including the Detroit Free Press at: http://bit.ly/2QxfdL6.
Comment by Dick Eastman: I
certainly cannot compete with Amy Dickinson’s nationally-syndicated
advice column but I will offer one piece of advice to genealogists: If
your research finds a something that was previously not widely known
within the family, you might want to stop and consider the implications
before you broadcast that information to your relatives. Do you really HAVE to tell everyone? or anyone?
12 Comments--see original article--click on 12 comments above to see--very informative.


Privacy
advocates and many others have since questioned the legality of using
the information for law enforcement purposes. Admittedly, the
information is publicly available for all to see. The genealogists who
contributed the information did so willingly and presumably gave
permission for the family DNA to be available to all. However, the
relatives of the uploading genealogists may or may not have given
permission for THEIR personal DNA information to be
made available to the public. After all, it isn’t the DNA of any one
individual; it is indeed the family’s DNA information. Not all family
members have agreed to having that information made available to
genealogists, law enforcement personnel, insurance companies, and
worldwide hackers alike.

Ok help me here. How could this be done? Even theoretically?