I had the honour of giving a presentation about Forensic Genetic Genealogy (FGG) at the recent Canadian Universities for Forensic Science (CUFFS) conference! (1) The program included fascinating presentations about forensic science. Although I felt a little out of place as a genealogist, I found the topics intriguing and thought-provoking.

A range of topics in forensic science were expertly presented. The well-respected Dr. Frank Crispino presented on the issues and the future of forensic science. He is one of the co-authors of “The Sydney declaration – Revisiting the essence of forensic science through its fundamental principles.” (3) His talk brought up many valid issues! It illuminated the corollaries between the struggles within forensic science and those of Forensic Genetic Genealogy. (4)

Forensic biology was my first forensics class, a requirement for the graduate certificate (5) in Forensic Genetic Genealogy at the University of New Haven. As the class progressed I began to realize forensic science and genealogy have surprising overlap. When we think of scientists we tend to think of people who wear white coats and work in a lab, not a genealogist at the archives examining records (or nowadays, at their computer). Indeed, Gurney et al. in their article “The need for standards and certification for investigative genetic genealogy, and a notice of action” write that “Forensic scientists generally work in laboratories and analyze physical evidence. IGG practitioners do not work in laboratories…they do not use instruments or reagents.” (6) Gurney doubles down on this in his paper “Investigative Genetic Genealogy and the First Amendment Right to Noninterference with Receipt.” He reiterates that “IGG practitioners do not work in wet labs or anywhere generally considered a science lab…[they] work from a computer and do not require a laboratory environment.” (7) These comments fundamentally misrepresent forensic science and what science is in general.

Science is not a task, it is a methodology. Genealogy follows a similar methodology.  Both involve continually making observations and forming and testing hypotheses.

The Sydney Declaration is a comprehensive overview of what forensic science is and the resemblance between each of the principles it outlines and those used in genealogical research is remarkable. 

Here is my Sydney Declaration for genealogists:

1. Activity and presence produce traces that are fundamental vectors of information (8) 

Genealogists don’t use “traces” to describe the information about the activity and presence of the people we are attempting to research, we call them sources. However, the principle is the same. The sources that we research are the foundation of our research—without them, we would not be able to do genealogy.

2. Scene investigation is a scientific and diagnostic endeavor requiring scientific expertise

“It is not enough to collect objects from a scene blindly.” (9) Similarly, we understand from the methodology pertaining to genealogy (called the Genealogical Proof Standard or GPS) that “[g]enealogy isn’t about collecting as many sources as we can any more than baking is about collecting as many ingredients as we can.” (10) As the bible of genealogy states: “we bear the responsibility of not just collecting facts (i.e., information), but studying the principles of research methodology, document analysis and evidence correlation, so we can correctly interpret the information we find.” (11) Clearly, the knowledge we have in both fields is important: “expertise is necessary for maximizing the extraction of information and for developing inferences.” (12) 

3. Forensic Science is case-based and reliant on scientific knowledge, investigative methodology and logical reasoning (13) 

This principle emphasizes the difference between science as methodology vs. science as task: “testing cannot be substituted for the scientific process itself…they do not constitute the science or the knowledge base on which the test relies.” (14) This is similar to genealogy, where it’s not so much about the source itself or the work we do with one particular source, but the process of following the GPS that is important. I also appreciate the statement that “most efforts regarding quality focus on tools rather than on enhancing the process.” (15) Certainly any genealogist who has seen an unsourced tree online with tens of thousands of people in it can agree that technology has made genealogy “efficient (as opposed to reliable).” (16) Sources are easier to find and access than ever before. We must ensure quality genealogical research methodology for the good of the field. 

Much of the difficulties in any field come with the use of language pertinent to that field. In forensic science, the problem is “the use of the pervasive term evidence in the English language.” (17) This word is also problematic in genealogy! Much like the “trace-sign-clue-proof” …moves through a complex transformation through reasoning,” (18) in genealogy we travel a path from source to evidence to proof. (19) 

4. Forensic science is an assessment of findings in context due to time asymmetry

“In many instances, the quality of the trace resulting from an activity is such that it is incomplete, imperfect and/or degraded by the passing of time.” (20) Just replace the word “trace” with the word “source” and that’s genealogy in a nutshell. 

5. Forensic science deals with a continuum of uncertainties

In forensic science, “uncertainties exist at every step of the process, and cannot be eliminated entirely.” (21) Similarly, genealogists “were not there when history happened, and the eyewitness accounts of those who were–if and when those accounts exist–may not be reliable.” (22) In both fields, understanding the limitations of the field and bolstering it with good methodology helps to manage these uncertainties so that solid conclusions can be reached.

6. Forensic Science has multi-dimensional purposes and contributions (23)

Since forensic science seeks to increase knowledge, contribute to incident investigations and support decisions in a legal context, it may seem like genealogy has no corollary. However, some genealogists do testify in court. Certainly while the type of knowledge varies, many genealogists are interested in adding to the general knowledge base. I appreciate the use of the term “citizen science” (24) in this paper since it has also been used to describe the work that genealogists have done to enhance the knowledge base of their field. (25)

7. Forensic Science findings acquire meaning in context

“Forensic science findings acquire meaning in context rather than have an intrinsic value of themselves,” (26) whereas in genealogy “facts do not speak for themselves. Facts are chameleons whose shape and color reflect their handlers.” (27) Recognizing that “it would be foolish to ignore the existence of bias” (28) is a hallmark of both forensic science and of genealogy (29).

Fundamentally, these principles exist to lay out a foundation for both of these fields. For forensic science, the difficulty lies in seeing itself as a cohesive field, rather than a collection of semi-related fields. For genealogists, the challenge lies in taking our field seriously, even if for us it is “just a hobby.” These struggles present opportunities for education and research that can move both fields forward, encourage sharing of knowledge, and provide a shared language for our work. 

---

Much thanks to Melissa Boes Rice for her revision of this piece

---

1. Canadian Universities for Forensic Science (https://cuffs-ucpsj.ca/en/ : accessed 23 May 2023).
2. Kevin_0019,  “There’s an imposter among us!,” Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/aww/comments/ispftu/theres_an_imposter_among_us/ : accessed 23 May 2023).
3. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration – Revisiting the essence of forensic science through its fundamental principles,” Forensic Science International, Volume 332 (January 2022), 111182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111182.
4. Jennifer Wiebe, “GSK, 5 years later: Still building the plane,” Jennealogie (https://maltsoda.wordpress.com/2023/04/20/gsk-5-years-later-still-building-the-plane/ : accessed 23 May 2023).
5. Jennifer Wiebe, “Forensic Investigative Genetic Genealogy (FIGG) Education and Certification,” Jennealogie (https://maltsoda.wordpress.com/2023/02/13/forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-figg-education-and-certification/ : accessed 23 May 2023).
6. David Gurney et al., “The need for standards and certification for investigative genetic genealogy, and a notice of action,” Forensic Science International 341 (December 2022), 111495.
7. David Gurney, “Investigative Genetic Genealogy and The First Amendment Right to Noninterference With Receipt,” First Amendment Law Review, Vol 2, Issue 1, p. 1-39.
8. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 3.
9. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 4.
10. Jennifer Wiebe, “The GPS: A Recipe for Success,” Jennealogie (https://maltsoda.wordpress.com/2020/05/08/the-gps-a-recipe-for-success/ : accessed 23 May 2023).
11. Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained (Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing Company, 2015), p. 18.
12. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 4.
13. Ibid.
14. Ibid.
15. Ibid.
16. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 5.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
19. Jennifer Wiebe, “Sources, Evidence and Proof,” Jennealogie (https://maltsoda.wordpress.com/2019/07/12/sources-evidence-and-proof/ : accessed 23 May 2023).
20. Claude Roux, et al. “ The Sydney declaration,” p. 5.
21. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 6
22. Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained, p. 17.
23. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 7.
24. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 6.
25. R. Granja, “Citizen science at the roots and as the future of forensic genetic genealogy,” International Journal of Police Science & Management (March 2023), https://doi.org/10.1177/14613557231164901.
26. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 7.
27. Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained, p. 18.
28. Claude Roux, et al. “The Sydney declaration,” p. 7.
29. Jennifer Wiebe, “Pick a Number, Any Number,” Jennealogie (https://maltsoda.wordpress.com/2022/06/01/pick-a-number-any-number/ : accessed 23 May 2023).