DNA Identification in Mass Fatality Incidents
Robert Shaler
Because we were asked to identify every fragment of human tissue, the smallest, most damaged samples were repeatedly tested. Each time—particularly, as we optimized protocols—we hoped to reveal a few more loci. The more compromised the sample, the more attempts we made to coax out the data.
In addition to managing communication within the laboratory, the project manager should manage relationships with external organizations. The laboratory represents just one component of a mass fatality incident response. By working closely with other response participants, the project manager can improve the laboratory's effectiveness and efficiency. (See Mass Fatality Incidents: A Guide for Human Forensic Identification.)
Needless to say, every organization has its own mission, goals, and way of conducting business. The project manager should work to understand the cultures of the various agencies and departments with which the laboratory will be working in the identification effort. In addition, the project manager should establish formal and informal channels for receiving and sharing information. For example, by building a relationship with the site recovery team, the project manager can gain insight into the volume and type of samples that will enter the laboratory during a particular timeframe. Exhibit 11 shows some of the organizations that may be involved in a mass fatality response.
Robert Shaler
It was virtually impossible to manage both routine casework and a mass fatality event the size of the World Trade Center without help. We immediately established disaster teams in the laboratory and appointed a liaison between the New York State Police and the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner laboratories. I kept managerial control of the WTC work and charged the deputy director with the daily operation of the laboratory.
Integration of the DNA effort in the overall response to a mass fatality disaster requires extensive communication between the laboratory and all other units with responsibility. One crucial lesson learned during the WTC DNA identification project is that it is impossible to overcommunicate during a mass fatality incident response. Aspects of DNA identification may not be understood by other groups that are involved in a mass disaster response; for example, sending a communication about collecting remains in clean paper—rather than plastic—bags could make the difference between obtaining a full 13-locus STR profile and a partial or failed profile. It is the project manager’s responsibility to ensure that the laboratory’s needs are understood by other response agencies.
As individuals and groups become preoccupied with their own obligations during a mass fatality response effort, it is possible to forget that introducing a seemingly minor change in the DNA identification process can affect the entire effort. To minimize miscommunication, the project manager should establish a single point of contact in each group involved. Regular meetings among key participants should be held. And, although the DNA project manager may initially have to guide the discussion to reduce digressions, these formal lines of communication are crucial.
The project manager should meet with the ME at least once a week. The meeting agenda should include:
- Overall project status from the perspective of the ME and the DNA laboratory.
- Sample collection, storage, and tracking issues.
- Identification issues across modalities.
- Information technology requirements and problems.
- Information to be presented to the media.
- Anticipated workload and possible constraints.
Representatives of the laboratory, designated by the project manager, also should plan to meet with partner laboratories at least once a week. The agenda for these meetings should include:
- Overall project status, including issues regarding the transfer and tracking of samples or extracts.
- Problems and solutions regarding sample analyses and data.
- Anticipated workload and possible constraints.
These meetings may be more effective if they are conducted one on one with representatives of the partner laboratories or with the entire partner laboratory staff. Meetings with other agencies (e.g., Federal Emergency Management Agency, investigating agencies) can be less frequent, but also should occur regularly and have written agendas.
