Editor's introduction: the Hill-Turney debate

The response by Dr Hill to the original paper (Turney, 2010) on the 2009 bushfire disaster in Victoria, Australia raises a number of interesting questions, not the least to do with how social and natural scientists communicate with each other. In particular, there is the central role played by DNA testing in the identification of victims and the extent to which other means of identification could also have been used to bring earlier closure to their families. Turney suggests that these other means are just as valid as those used by forensic scientists, and moves to a wider policy evaluation of the processes involved. Hill however feels strongly that the scientific ‘gold standard’ should take precedence. He also feels that Turney's exposition is couched as a critique of science as opposed to public policy. As editor, I felt that this debate should be brought to the wider readership of New Genetics and Society, and I welcome any further thoughts that you might have.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2011.628848