AFET KURBANLARININ KİMLİKLENDİRİLMESİNDE KULLANILAN YÖNTEMLER VE ÜLKEMİZDEKİ DURUM

Abstract

Büyük can kayıplarının meydana geldiği afetlerde en zorlu aşamalardan biri farklı disiplinlerden uzmanların katılımlarını gerektiren “afet kurbanlarının kimliklendirilmesi” sürecidir. Bu aşamada kimliklendirmede kesin sonuç veren altın standart yöntemlerin yanı sıra, karşılaştırma örnek havuzunu daraltan ve destekleyici yöntemler de kullanılır. Birincil kriterler olarak da adlandırılan altın standart üç yöntem, parmak izi incelemesi, dental analiz ve DNA analizidir. Herhangi birinden alınan pozitif sonuç kimliklendirme için yeterli olsa da afetin oluş şekli ve insan kalıntılarının içinde bulunduğu durum hangi yöntemin ön plana çıkacağını belirler. Maliyet ve uygulama kolaylığı açısından DNA analizleri, parmak izi incelemeleri ve dental analizlerden sonra tercih edilmesi gereken pahalı ve zahmetli bir yöntemdir. Ancak diğer yöntemlerin sonuç verebilmesi için de karşılaştırmada kullanılacak ölüm öncesi verilerin kayıtlarının düzenli tutuluyor olması gerekir. Bu nedenle bir ülkenin afet kurbanlarını kimliklendirme süreci açısından gelişmişliği ile süreçte DNA analizlerine başvurma oranı arasında ters bir ilişki olduğu söylenebilir. Ülkemizde parmak izi kayıtları ile ilgili sorunlar büyük ölçüde çözümlenmiş olsa da dental kayıtların tutulması ile ilgili halen sorunlar yaşanmaktadır. Bu gerçeklerden yola çıkarak, görev tanımı afet kurbanlarını kimliklendirme olan, farklı disiplinlerde uzmanların varlığını gerektiren ekiplerin kurulması ve ölüm öncesi kayıtlarla ilgili düzenlemelerin hayata geçirilmesi doğal afet ve terör olaylarının sıklıkla yaşandığı ülkemizde önemli bir önceliktir.

Keywords

• Afet
• Kimliklendirme
• DVI
• Interpol
• DNA
• Parmak İzi

DISASTER VICTIM IDENTIFICATION AND THE PRACTICE IN TURKEY

Abstract

The most challenging phase of a mass disaster is the “victim identification” process, which requires experts from different disciplines. Besides the standard methods that give precise results in identification, methods that help narrow down the comparison sample pool are also employed. The three gold standard identification methods defined as the primary ones are fingerprint examination, dental analysis and DNA analysis. Although the positive result obtained from any of these methods is sufficient for identification, the human remains’ situation decides which method will come forward. DNA analysis should be the last choice after fingerprint and dental analysis in terms of cost and feasibility. However, in order for other methods to give results, it is required to have regularly kept records of antemortem fingerprint and dental data. For this reason, it can be claimed that there is an inverse relationship between a development level of a country in disaster management and the rate of using DNA analysis in the identification process. The problems with fingerprint records have been significantly solved in our country, but there are still problems related to dental records. Based on these facts, the establishment of teams that require experts from different disciplines, whose only assignment is to identify the victims of disasters, and the implementation of regulations regarding antemortem records is an essential priority in our country, where natural disasters and terrorist incidents frequently occur.

Keywords

• Disaster
• Identification
• DVI
• Interpol
• DNA
• Fingerprint

References

1. Aronson, J.D., London, A.J. (2011). “Recovery and Identification of The Missing After Disaster: Case Studies, Ethical Guidelines and Policy Recommendations” Ethics, History, and Public Policy Project Course, Fall 2011.
2. Atsu, S.S., Aka, P.S., Kucukesmen, H.C., Kilicarslan, M.A., Atakan, C. (2005). Age-related changes in tooth enamel as measured by electron microscopy: implications for porcelain laminate veneers. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 94 (4), 336-341
3. Atsü, S.S., Gökdemir, K., Kedici, P.S. (1998). Human dentinal structure as an indicator of age. The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology 16 (2), 27-29.
4. Bilge, Y., Kedici, PS., Doğan Alakoç, Y., Ülküer, Ü., İlkyaz, Y. (2003). The identification of a dismembered human body: a multidisciplinary approach. Forensic Science International. 137:141–146.
5. Black, S., & Hackman, L. (2009). Disaster Victim Identification. Wiley Encyclopedia of Forensic Science.
6. Brough, A.L., Morgan, B., Rutty, G.N. (2015). The basics of disaster victim identification. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging. Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 29-37.
7. Budimlija, Z.M., Prinz, M.K., Zelson-Mundorff, A., Wiersema, J., Bartelink, E., MacKinnon, G.,
8. Nazzaruolo, B.L., Estacio, S.M., Hennesey, M.J., Shaler, R.C. (2003). “World Trade Center Human Identification Project: Experiences With Individual Body Identification Cases”. Croatian Medical Journal 44 (3): 259-263.

9. Butler, J. (2005). Forensic DNA Typing; Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers. Academic Press.
10. De Boer, H.H., Blau, S., Delabarde, T., Hackman, L. (2018). “The role of forensic anthropology in disaster victim identification (DVI): recent developments and future prospects”, Forensic Sciences Research 2018 Oct 2;4(4):303-315
11. Gaglietti, N.M., Silva, R.H.A. (2017). Primary Identification Methods and Their Effectiveness in Mass Disaster Situations: A Literature Review. Arab Journal of Forensic Sciences & Forensic Medicine. Volume1 (5) 576-582.
12. Hong, W.H. (2004). “The Progress And Controlling Situation Of Daegu Subway Fire Disaster” International Association for Fire Safety Science AOFST Symposium 6.
13. https://www.jandarma.gov.tr/asayis/arama-ve-kurtarma-timleri Erişim tarihi: 05.12.2020
14. Interpol, (2018). DVI Guide https://www.interpol.int/content/ download/ 589/file/18Y1344%20 E%20 DVI_Guide.pdf?inLanguage=eng-GB Erişim Tarihi: 05.12.2020
15. James, H.E. (2005). “Thai Tsunami Victim Identification- Overview to Date” The Journal of Forensic Odonto-Stomatology, Vol.23 No.1, June 2005.
16. Khoo, L.S., Lai, P.S., Hasmi, A.H., Mahmood, S.M. (2016). “Secondary Identifier for Positive Identification in DVI” Forensic Sci Crimino, 2016 Volume 1(1): 1-3.
17. Kloosterman, A.D., Kersbergen, P. (2003). Efficacy and limits of genotyping low copy number DNA samples by multiplex PCR of STR loci. International Congress Series. 1239:795-798.
18. Leditschke, J., Collett, S., Ellen, R. (2010). “Mortuary operations in the aftermath of the 2009 Victorian bushfires.” Forensic Sci Int. 2011 Feb 25;205(1-3):8-14
19. Lessig, R., Rotschild, M. (2012). “International standards in cases of mass disaster victim identification (DVI)”, Forensic Sci Med Pathol 8:197–199.
20. Marchi, E. (2004). “Methods Developed to Identify Victims of the World Trade Center Disaster” American Laboratory March 2004.
21. O'Donnell, C., Iino, M., Mansharan, K., Leditscke, J., Woodford, N. (2011). “Contribution of postmortem multidetector CT scanning to identification of the deceased in a mass disaster: Experience gained from the 2009 Victorian bushfires.” Forensic Sci Int. 2011 Feb 25;205(1-3):15-28.
22. Park, D.K., Park, K.H., Ko, J.S., Kim, Y.S., Chung, N.E., Ahn, Y.W., Han, S.H. (2009). “The Role of Forensic Anthropology in the Examination of the Daegu Subway Disaster” J Forensic Sci, May 2009, Vol. 54, No. 3.
23. Pittayapat, P., Jacobs, R., De Valck, E., Vandermeulen, D., Willems, G. (2012). Forensic odontology in the disaster victim identification process. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 1;30(1):1-12
24. Rudin, N., Inmann, K. (2002). An Introduction to Forensic DNA Analysis. CRC Pres. London s: 21-31.) Soysal, Z. (Ed.), Çakalır, C. (Ed.) (1999). Adli Tıp Cilt I. İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi Cerrahpaşa Tıp Fakültesi Yayınları.
25. Sribanditmongkol, P., Pongpanitanont, P., Porntrakulseree, N., Petju, M., Kunaratanapruk, S. (2005). Forensic aspect of disaster casualty management. WHO Conference on the Health Aspects of the Tsunami Disaster in Asia; Phuket, Thailand; 4–6 May 2005. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available: http://www.who.int/hac/events/ tsunamiconf/ presentations/ en/ index.html.
26. Thompson, J., Solomon, M. (1991). “Body recovery teams at disasters: trauma or challenge?” University College and Middlesex School of Medicine Published online: 29 May 2007.
27. Toupenay, S., Cheikh, A.B., Ludes, B., Felizardo, R. (2020). Forensic odontology identification response to terrorist attacks in Paris November 2015, Forensic Sciences Research, 5:3, 214-222
28. Tsokos, M., Lessig, R., Grundmann, C., Benthaus, S., Perschel, O. (2005). “experiences in tsunami victim identification” Int J Legal Med (2006) 120: 185–187.
29. Tug, A., Alakoç, YD., Çetin, C.M., Hancı, İ.H. (2002). Afet Kurbanlarında Kimlik Tespiti. Adli Bilimler Dergisi, 1(2):11-12.
30. Türkiye’de Afetler. (2018). Erişim adresi: https://www.afad.gov.tr/ kurumlar/afad.gov.tr /35429/xfiles/ Turkiye_de_Afetler.pdf.
31. Valenzuela, A., Martin de las Heras, S., Marques, T., Exposito, N., Bohoyo, J.M. (2000). The application of dental methods of identification to human burn victims in a mass disaster. Int J Legal Med. 113(4):236-9
32. Waaler, E. (1972). “Personal Identification In Mass Disasters” Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 1972 vol: 48 no:4.
33. Wright, K., Mundorff, A., Chaseling, J., Forrest, A., Maguire, C., Crane, D.I. (2015). “A new disaster victim identification management strategy targeting ‘‘near identification-threshold’’ cases: Experiences from the Boxing Day tsunami” Forensic Science International 250 (2015) 91–97.
34. Yasar, Z.F., Durukan, E., Buken, E. (2018). The Knowledge Level of Dentists in Turkey About Their Potential Role on the Disaster Victims Identification (DVI) Team. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2019 Jun;13(3):533-538. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2018.111. Epub 2018 Nov 12.