NAS Recommendation 1: National Institute of Forensic Science

The first recommendation of the National Research Council’s (AKA National Academy of Sciences or NAS) report titled “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” is the creation of the National Institute of Forensic Science (NIFS).  This new agency would be charged with establishing best practices, overseeing funding, accreditation and certification processes, and, in general, giving forensic science the proper level of attention, stability, and oversight it needs.  The recommendation also calls for NIFS to have strong ties to the existing forensic community but that it “must not be in any way committed to the existing system, but should be informed by its experiences.”

But There’s The Dreamy Draft Legislation…

The reasoning behind the creation of an entirely new federal agency is laid out quite clearly by the committee in the report.  For anyone still clinging to the hope of the “draft legislation” I discussed in my last post, you should consider that the “draft legislation” completely ignores the report’s admonishment that no current federal agency can be entrusted with carrying out the rest of the recommendations because

“There is little doubt that some existing federal entities are too wedded to the current ‘fragmented’ forensic science community, which is deficient in too many respects…

The committee thus concluded that the problems at issue are too serious and important to be subsumed by an existing federal agency…

A new organization should not be encumbered by the assumptions, expectations, and deficiencies of the existing fragmented infrastructure, which has failed to address the needs and challenges of the forensic science disciplines.”

Just a few weeks ago, on May 6, Hon. Harry Edwards, Senior Circuit Court Judge and Co-Chair of the NAS committee, made a presentation at a conference of the District Court of the District of Columbia in which he stated

“I started the NAS project with no skepticism regarding the forensic science community…

I was surprisingly mistaken in what I assumed.”

In case you missed the subtleties in the language there and in the Senate Judiciary hearing on the subject in September 2009, Washington is not in love with the world of forensic science right now.

But the Feds Screw Stuff Up

Of those who are making objections to the creation of NIFS, there seem to be two types of objections:

1. How could we entrust the sacred, perfect world of forensic science to the inept federal government?
2. No more big government!

To those objections I say:

1. Are you kidding me?
2. En garde.

First, the world of forensic science is far from perfect (too far) and that is the entire point. There are a lot of dedicated people but it takes more than that. Creating an agency- hell, giving us an agency- with which to make our science into what we all want it to be could be a dream come true if everyone would put down the pitchforks and work toward the ideals of the science instead of throwing up walls. Yes, there will be missteps because, after all, it is the federal government and I think there’s a quota system for embarrassing screw-ups. However, most, if not all, forensic scientists have worked for a government agency before, so we’ll all feel right at home.

Secondly, for the big government opponents… how do you think things like the electricity grid, the interstate highway system, putting satellites in space so your cell phone works, international trade agreements so you can buy your cell phone, peace treaties, war declarations, raising armies (and navies and air forces and marines, oo-rah), food safety inspections, drug safety evaluations, coordinating air traffic, making sure your pilot is a pilot, and all the other things that you think just happen and that keep the United States from being a third world country… how do you think those things happen? That’s because you live in a country with a functioning federal government.

I’m not going to argue that big, unlimited government is the way to go, but the federal government exists to take care of those big picture issues. If you think about it, maybe making sure that the person who is about to help put you in prison or on death row is a person who is trustworthy and qualified to do so might just be one of those issues.

Having a National Institute of Forensic Sciences would be an honor for forensic scientists. I have worked as a research scientist at a federal agency before and it was not a bad experience. I felt I could carry out my research wherever the science took me and not where politics were going at the time. Try doing that under a commission of Presidential appointees.

There are changes coming that cannot be avoided and some of them may be uncomfortable. The creation of a new agency would probably have its awkward moments as any new venture would, but I hope the forensic community would welcome it once the time comes. Hopefully the creation of NIFS will be carried out in a bold and definitive way so as not to be dragged down by politics, egos, or mediocrity.

See all NAS posts.