Body identification and what they will do with them

[MagicKingdom05]

Foxnews just had a doctor on talking about how they indentify bodies and he mentioned that visual identification won't work, most of them probably don't have ID on them, and that dental indentification won't work, because they would have to locate the dentist. He mentioned that probably the only way will be through DNA.

What I'm wondering is if it's going to be a timely process, what do they do with the bodies to prevent them from passing on some kind of disease. I understand that they want to match up as many to there family as they should, but wouldn't they have to destroy them in a timely fasion to prevent the spread of disease.

 

[WANNABE@WDW]

Hi, I live outside of Baton Rouge. They have set up a morgue in another nearby town. They have over 100 forensic scientist coming in from all over the country to handle the identification process. They have a decontamination area. They are set up in a warehouse that has been outfitted to deal with any sort of health issues. The Dr in charge appeared to be very dedicated to this important job.

 

[MagicKingdom05]

WANNABE@WDW,

Thanks for the info.

 

[JimMIA]

Foxnews just had a doctor on talking about how they indentify bodies and he mentioned that visual identification won't work, most of them probably don't have ID on them, and that dental indentification won't work, because they would have to locate the dentist. He mentioned that probably the only way will be through DNA.

Yes, they will have to use DNA.

Visual will not work in most cases.

Dental would work if you suspected you knew who the victim was and you could determine who their dentist was...and if the dentist's records were intact. I don't know if they'll try that. They might, if they recover a body in a house at a known address, for example. If they have the dental records, that will be a quicker ID than DNA.

DNA will be the only method for many IDs. Authorities in SE Asia have already cautioned the U.S. to take their time with DNA analysis because they apparently had a high number of inaccurate results...which could occur for a variety of reasons.

The process is not quick or easy, and considering the number of victims potentially needing to be ID'd, it could take a long, long time. They will take DNA samples from found bodies and analyze them. The output of that analysis is a numerical profile which they can put in a database.

DNA evidence is similar to fingerprint evidence, in that you have to have a standard to match. So they will also have to take DNA samples from close relatives of missing persons. Then, they will run those profiles against their victim database and see if they get any hits. A lot of the accuracy of those comparisons will depend on which relatives they have profiles for. In some cases it will be a slam dunk; in others it will be a "maybe," or they just won't be able to say at all.

Unfortunately, many victims will never be ID'd.

 

[jackskellingtonsgirl]

My mom and I were talking about this.

On CNN somebody said they will do DNA, fingerprint, and dental profiles. But bodies that have been in the water won't fingerprint very well. I hadn't thought about most of the dental records being washed away, but DUH! So DNA is the obvious choice. With the drawback being that there has to be someone to match it with.

I am also wondering how long they will store remains for families to claim before they have to dispose of them. At some point storage space will become an issue. Sad.

 

[JimMIA]

But bodies that have been in the water won't fingerprint very well.

Some will and some won't. However, there are two good things about fingerprints in addition to the obvious. One is that there are millions of fingerprints already on file for a wide variety of reasons, and those records can be searched electronically. That means you can ID people without having relatives to contact. The other good thing is that fingerprint technology has advanced greatly in the last 20 years or so, and now you don't need most or all of a print to make an identification.

So DNA is the obvious choice. With the drawback being that there has to be someone to match it with.

Well, the first thing the authorities will do is some basic detective work. Where was the body found? The address alone may give us a darn good idea of who the person is. As someone noted above, many bodies will not have ID on them, but many will. Many more will be found in homes where other documents will give clues, or in vehicles which can be traced. If bodies were found together, once you ID one you will gain important clues for others. There will be missing person reports saying the person was a male of a certain age and race, last seen wearing the following clothing. When you find someone generally matching a description like that, you will have important clues and a much easier task. Without going on ad nauseum, there will be a lot of good old fashion detective work before they start with the forensic evidence.

In addition, DNA identification is not as complicated and difficult as it sounds. It does take time, and you do have to have relatives DNA to match. Collecting DNA samples is quick, easy and painless -- it's nothing more than some basic paperwork to identify who the sample came from, and then a few seconds of chewing on a cotton cloth to provide a saliva sample. The more difficult thing will be finding the right relatives to compare, but I'm sure they will not make themselves hard to find. I'm sure that process will start pretty quickly once they get people settled in living arrangements where they will be for a few months, if it hasn't already. I'd think it would eventually become a standard part of the registration routine when a victim is placed in a housing arrangement.

As I said above, there will be unidentified bodies, and there will also be missing people who are never located. I'm not sure what the numbers are, but I know there are still a considerable number of unidentified remains from the World Trade Center and numerous people still missing.

 

[JimMIA]

I understand that they want to match up as many to there family as they should, but wouldn't they have to destroy them in a timely fasion to prevent the spread of disease.

I think the government will do whatever they need to do for temporary storage, and there are ways to reduce the disease risk once the remains have been removed from the environment. The larger disease risk will be within the devastated areas themselves, because of contaminants and other issues there which can't be dealt with quickly -- not just human remains, but animal bodies, garbage, chemicals, vermin, etc, etc.

I think the larger problem will be for the families. Once you ID remains, what do you do if the family is in Houston...or Boston? There will be many difficult issues in the months ahead. I'm sure there will be a process to handle remains with dignity and respect, but it's tough to speculate on what that will be at this point.