Ethical issues in the use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system: a systematic review

Abstract

Background: The use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system remains a subject of ongoing debate. Since behavioral genetic evidence is often used in criminal defense arguments, it is crucial to critically examine the ethical challenges associated with its application. Objective: This article seeks to identify and analyze these ethical concerns to ensure the responsible and equitable integration of genetic testing, when deemed necessary, into the judiciary system. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, supplemented by manual searches of reference lists to identify additional relevant studies. Results: The search yielded 1,023 publications, 12 of which met the inclusion criteria. Seven key ethical concerns were identified: the risks of discrimination, stigmatization, eugenic reasoning, deterministic interpretations, overestimation of dangerousness, privacy violations, and medicalization, along with the risks posed by limited scientific literacy among legal professionals. Conclusion: The ethical challenges associated with genetic predictions of aggressive behavior underscore the need for a critical and multidisciplinary approach to their use in the criminal justice system. Collaboration among bioethicists, legal scholars, scientists, and communication experts is crucial to prevent misuse and reduce potential biases. Such an approach will help ensure that genetic insights are ethically applied, accurately interpreted, and used to promote justice rather than exacerbate systemic inequalities.