Bisson: Activist encourages leadership communication

Do you own the rights to your body?

Charlene Bisson

It’s a philosophical debate that has various answers depending on one’s viewpoint.

The Arizona legislature considered Senate Bill 1475, also known as the DNA identification database bill, which could have mandated DNA testing for a broad range of occupations, including jobs already requiring fingerprinting. It failed in the Senate Rules Committee earlier this year. District 22 Sen. David Livingston (R-Peoria) sponsored the bill in the state’s Fifty-Fourth Legislature in response to Phoenix’s Hacienda Healthcare incident in which a licensed nurse practitioner allegedly impregnated a comatose patient.

The bill is dead so why am I addressing it now?

Liz Recchia, chair of the Peoria Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee, encourages people to act now, alerting your elected state officials on your beliefs for or against DNA testing. Tell your local Arizona leaders your thoughts on the matter before another bill is brought forward to the legislature in the future.

“This is a civil rights issue,” Ms. Recchia stressed.

Due to Ms. Recchia’s efforts early on, many business leaders opposed Senate Bill 1475 in its original form, requesting revisions that happened in updated drafts of the bill.

According to a story written by Independent Newsmedia News Editor Philip Haldiman, found on, the last bill presented to the Senate Rules Committee focused on jobs that involve caring for people with intellectual disabilities, and restricted DNA testing to those required by law to submit fingerprints for purposes of identification for a license or certificate.

In the article, Ms. Recchia explained there are many problematic issues with DNA storage ranging from numerous documented examples of DNA collection mistakes and transfer to mistaken DNA interpretation, leading to innocent people being convicted or giving up their right to a defense.
“From a law abiding citizen point of view, why should I be placed under constant surveillance when I have done nothing wrong? That looks a bit like guilty until proven innocent,” she stated. “Those of us who have licenses already go through numerous background checks, drug tests and assorted other investigations into our lives. But being added to a criminal registry is a bit over the top.”

Mr. Haldiman’s article further acknowledged opinion by Attorney Dan Barr who stated fingerprints should be more than adequate for jobs that require licensing, and that the previous version of the law would have essentially allowed the state to take DNA from people without probable cause.

“There are significant privacy issues that go beyond having fingerprints and I don’t understand the need for the state of Arizona to need the DNA of school teachers,” he said.

So what do you think about a state mandate on DNA testing?

You can contact the following District 12 leadership at the Arizona State Legislature: Eddie Farnsworth, 602-926-5735,; Rep. Travis W. Grantham, 602-926-4868,; and Rep. Warren Petersen, 602-926-4136,

Charlene Bisson
Queen Creek Independent

You are encouraged to leave relevant comments but engaging in personal attacks, threats, online bullying or commercial spam will not be allowed. All comments should remain within the bounds of fair play and civility. (You can disagree with others courteously, without being disagreeable.) Feel free to express yourself but keep an open mind toward finding value in what others say. To report abuse or spam, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box.

Facebook Comment