The Foreign Service Journal, April 2010

16 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / A P R I L 2 0 1 0 the entire chain of custody right up to the mail room. (The few additional minutes this process would take would be more than saved by the officer or fraud prevention unit not having to in- terview so many applicants at length.) On receipt of the post sample, the lab in the U.S. would generate a result and send it electronically back to the post, where an officer would open it and associate it with the petition and the petitioner’s sample. The DNA matching process could either be done remotely by the lab or be automated. Automated comparison of DNA results might seem unimaginable today, but not that long ago, fingerprints used to be compared manually. Now we have the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System. DNA results, with all their unique variables, could certainly be reduced to a digital format that would allow auto- mated electronic comparison. Off-the- shelf software already exists to do this and, with the kind of caseload DHS and State would bring, proprietary soft- ware linked to existing systems could soon be affordable and feasible. For appeals where samples didn’t match, results could be manually reviewed by the lab’s expert or new samples could be sent to a different lab, with an addi- tional fee, refundable if the applicant is proven right. Such a system would take some money and programming to set up, but it would be worth it. The benefits would be: (a) lowering the routine workload for officers and fraud preven- tion units, allowing them to clear back- logs and concentrate on IV cases where their time would get actionable results; (b) reducing the cost of DNA testing significantly and speeding it up; (c) es- tablishing a secure electronic baseline record for any future applications from the same petitioner or beneficiary, at no extra cost; and (d) lowering the num- ber of fraudulent applications. It would accomplish the latter by eliminating loopholes for fraud in the DNA sample chain of custody, and by making petitioners pay in money and time for falsely claiming blood relation- ships. In the present process, there are no penalties for claiming as many false beneficiaries as a petitioner chooses. A Reality-Based System A system incorporating DNA from the outset would deal with the world as it is, instead of as we wish it were. The truth is that if any of us were the one family member to have achieved U.S. citizenship, we’d be sorely tempted to claim as many non-blood relatives as possible. Not surprisingly, a 2008 State Department/DHS study of refugee processing in Kenya was “able to con- firm all claimed biological relationships in fewer than 20 percent of cases (fam- ily units)” out of a 500-person sample. Incentivizing DNA testing in all blood-based IV cases, and requiring a fee for it, would eliminate the free ride for false claims. Petitioners or appli- cants who refused testing would have to wait until the FPU had time to prop- erly investigate their cases. Another variation could be to charge $1,000 for an entire DNA series (e.g., parents, sib- lings or unlimited children) but re- fund half of the amount in cases where the claims are true. That way petitioners would have to accept fi- nancial consequences for any false claims, and the fraudulent would sub- sidize the honest. Given demographic, political, eco- nomic and environmental trends, the world is not going to run out of eager potential emigrants any time soon. If America wants to have a lawful, or- derly and fair immigrant flow into the country mainly based on family reuni- fication, we need to accept that many applicants will continue to commit fraud, and process cases accordingly. Just as biometrics clearly represents the future of identity documents, so DNAmust become the standard oper- ating procedure in the service of our consular customers. Not long ago, the idea of using printed visa foils instead of ink stamps, adding photos to the ap- plicant record, or electronically re- cording and comparing fingerprints or facial scans, seemed technically infea- sible, cost-prohibitive or unduly intru- sive to many people. All those inno- vations long ago proved their worth. Sooner or later, DNA testing for visa cases, perhaps by non-invasive, instant scan much like today’s fingerprints and retinal scans, will seem as normal as using paper documents, only more se- cure and verifiable. Moving to such a system would enable CA and DHS to lead the field. ■ Simon Hankinson joined the Foreign Service in 1999. Currently the U.S. consul in Bratislava, he previously served in India, Fiji and Ghana. S P E A K I N G O U T Split interviews and other techniques can be effective, but are time- consuming and don’t always provide actionable results.