Podcast Review: The Gift – Forbidden

I was excited to embark on the third series of Jenny Kleeman's revelatory BBC Radio 4 podcast 'The Gift', looking at the consequences of individuals taking at-home DNA tests. While other episodes may tell the story of long-hidden family secrets or crimes solved via identification of the perpetrator's relatives, this episode presented the case of a legal situation in France, which is in stark contrast with many other countries, including my own, the UK.

Audrey and Arthur were both conceived using donor sperm in Paris. They met through their shared desire to find their biological fathers. They felt an instant strong attraction accompanied by an uncomfortable question: could they be half-siblings?

In the UK and many other countries, an at-home DNA test would have answered this question quickly. However, in France, direct-to-consumer genetic tests are illegal under the French Bioethics Framework of 1994. In 2011, with the increase in availability and popularity of such tests, this framework was updated to include:

'The fact that a person requests the examination of his or her genetic characteristics or those of a third party or the identification of a person by his or her genetic fingerprints outside the conditions provided for by law is punishable by a fine of €3750.'

The 'conditions provided by law' require a mandate from a medical doctor, a research scientist or a judge. I was not aware of this before listening to this episode, and it brought the complexity of this legislation into sharp focus.

France is the only European country which has banned consumer genetic tests. Further afield, North Korea, Yemen and Iraq restrict them based on national security and religious or cultural considerations, but in France the justification is based on the risk of family breakdown, and of sending such sensitive information to external companies. As Audrey says in the podcast: 'The French DNA belongs to the French scientists'.

This brought to mind the times I provided my own DNA, once for an at-home commercial test and once for a research study. Had I given away my most valuable commodity? Who has access to my data? How could they benefit? Could it, one day, be used against me? These are important questions for anyone to consider before taking a genetic test. But, should it be up to governments to decide on behalf of their citizens?

I am aware that France has other restrictions that the UK does not have and, perhaps, as a country, they are more cautious. For example, Article L231-2 of the French Sports Code, which enforces health declaration requirements, has led to the suspension of community parkrun events; and Article 57 of the French Civil Code empowers registrars to question a parent's choice of name if it might be considered contrary to the interests of the child.

In this modern age of fast-moving technology and artificial intelligence, there are endless possibilities for how stored DNA sequences may be used in the future. I am sure there are many customers of at-home DNA tests who have not fully read the terms and conditions and, perhaps, do not appreciate who has access to their genetic data or how it could be used.

At the moment, though, I am glad to live in a country where my choice was not restricted, and people can seek out this information should they wish. But this episode gave me food for thought.

The episode explores the couple's resulting predicament: they were anxious about embarking on a relationship which could in itself be illegal, and potentially cause an increased chance of a deleterious recessive genetic condition for their offspring. As a professional bioethics lawyer, Audrey was ideally qualified to appeal this law.

Unfortunately for Audrey and Arthur, in 2015, the highest administrative court in France rejected their final appeal. They attempted to answer their query by illegal means, but concerned that they had employed the services of a charlatan, they could not trust the answer that apparently was reassuring. They decided to bite the bullet: 'We married and took the risk,' and started their family. Eventually, in an undisclosed manner, they found out the truth of their biological origins. And were they related? You will have to listen to find out.

This episode is different from the others covered by this series. It shone a light on a legal framework I had no idea about and made me question whether we are too free with our genetic data. Although other episodes have had juicy revelations, this episode is more focused on a legal discrepancy which is hindering individuals from seeking readily available information. I enjoyed the episode and would recommend it, as I would any from this series. It is well-presented, and the story was a perfect case to exemplify the challenges the law poses.