The first speaker discusses the nature of and the parameters for the maintenance of DNA databases at the Federal, State, and local levels, as well as standards for retaining forensic DNA samples and the use of forensic DNA to determine ancestry (race). At the national level, the DNA database is restricted to unknown suspects and convicted offenders, including samples provided by State and local law enforcement agencies. State and local DNA databases have their own regulations for retaining DNA samples. The second speaker frames the issue of "genetic privacy" raised by the existence of DNA samples and their analysis. Given that DNA analysis actually and potentially reveals a person's genetic profile related not only to identification but also to medical conditions and physical properties, the issue is raised as to how DNA information is to be managed, by whom, and under what regulations. The speaker reviews the nature of State laws that regulate the use of DNA information and how privacy concerns are balanced with public-interest uses of DNA in law enforcement, research, and public health. The speaker advocates giving each individual control over how his/her DNA information is to be used, except when the public interest demands that this right be overridden. The speaker also questions whether laws that attempt to regulate the use of DNA information are enforceable under all conditions. The third speaker considers whether individual privacy as it relates to DNA information is a right under the U.S. Constitution. Reviewing existing relevant court cases, he concludes that it is not a right under the U.S. Constitution, and even if it were found to be, the right would only be enforceable against government policy and action. He notes that multitudes of DNA samples are in the private custody of hospitals, pharmacies, and labs. Any constraints on the management of these DNA samples must be established under State law. The fourth speaker is a law enforcement officer who cites examples of how serious crimes in his jurisdiction have been solved through DNA analysis. He also notes that persons have been excluded from suspicion and consequent stigmatization through DNA analysis. He argues that reasonable restrictions must be placed on the use of DNA by criminal justice agencies to ensure the information is not misused, but there should be no obstructions to its legitimate use in identifying and convicting those guilty of criminal acts.