The Role of DNA Technology in Reproductive Punishment 

September 23, 2026

The Role of DNA Technology in Reproductive Punishment

By Urvi Kaul

In 2004, twenty-five-year-old Maricela Frausto went to the bathroom and fainted. She awoke and realized she was in labor. She gave birth, but she never heard the baby cry or take a breath. Two days later, she left the baby’s body along County Road 448, just outside the city of Hondo, in Medina County, Texas. Nineteen years later, Maricela received a knock on her door from the Medina County Sheriff Department, arresting her on charges of capital murder.1

Maricela’s story reflects a growing trend in which women across the United States have been arrested after DNA evidence has linked them to cold “Baby Doe” cases. A “Baby Doe” case refers to a law enforcement investigation into the abandonment and death of unidentified infants. Following the 2018 arrest of Joseph James DeAngelo Jr., also known as the Golden State Killer, in which law enforcement utilized the open-source genomic database GEDMatch to connect DeAngelo Jr. to the crimes, there has been increased interest in the use of genomic data to solve cold cases.2 Since 2019, at least thirty-eight women have been linked to previously unidentified infants and have faced a variety of charges, including murder, manslaughter, cruelty to children, reckless abandonment, desecration of a corpse, and obstruction of justice.3 According to New York Times reporting, legal outcomes for the cases resulted in a range of prison time, anywhere from two years to life.4 At least two women who were approached by police have died by suicide after being contacted by detectives about the case.5 Out of all the women identified, only four were not charged.6 Every woman arrested was over the age of thirty-five, and the average age was forty-nine years old at the time of arrest. In fifteen of the cases, the women gave birth at or under the age of twenty-five, and many of the women describe not knowing they were pregnant until going into labor — often alone, without medical care, giving birth in unsafe situations such as bathrooms and cars. Some of the women remain adamant that their babies were stillborn. These cases show how the state has greater interest in prosecuting decades-old cold cases than recognizing the individual and societal structures which may result in infanticide.

Policing under capitalist patriarchy favors punitive punishment for women deemed to be “unmotherly,” and increasingly denies women autonomy over their bodies in favor of the unborn and young, also known as “fetal coverture.”7  The lack of federal or state criminal codes specific to infanticide results in women being charged with homicide regardless of their potential vulnerabilities during pregnancy, including unwanted pregnancy, mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, trauma, disability, and poverty.8 In addition, the increasing introduction of restrictive abortion bans nationwide exacerbates this already precarious reproductive health landscape in the United States. These “Baby Doe” cases inform us of new forms of reproductive and genetic surveillance directed at women and at pregnancy-capable people at large. In an era of mass surveillance capitalism in which companies collect and store massive amounts of personal genomic data, direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic ancestry testing companies reuse and share customer information with a variety of third-party cooperators, creating an ecosystem of data that substantially bolsters genetic surveillance capitalism.9 This data implicates not only individuals who have consented to share their genomic data but also those distantly related to them.10

“How Does Forensic Genetic Genealogy Work?” 

Genetic genealogy is the use of DNA profiling to infer genetic relationships between individuals. Because genetic material is passed from parent to offspring, genomic data can be used to reconstruct familial relationships. Investigative or forensic genetic genealogy utilizes these methods alongside traditional genealogy mapping to produce investigative leads in criminal investigations and missing persons cases.11

For forensic investigations, law enforcement needs two things to utilize genetic genealogy: first, they need DNA from the crime scene or case; and second, they need access to a DNA database to make a “match.” In 1994, the United States Congress passed the DNA Identification Act, authorizing the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to create databases for convicted offenders, missing persons, and forensic samples collected at scenes. In 1998, the Combined DNA Identification System (CODIS) was launched across the nation, and it is now an internationally accessible genetic database for law enforcement. As of 2021, fifty-eight other countries utilize CODIS for their own law enforcement identification purposes.12 In order for a genetic “match” to be found, the individual has to already be in an accessible law enforcement database. In other words, if law enforcement had DNA from a crime scene, the individual or a relative would’ve already had to have been prosecuted for a crime or been forced to provide a DNA sample entered into CODIS.13 The introduction of DTC genetic ancestry companies, such as FamilyTreeDNA in 2000 and 23andMe in 2006, quickly expanded the amount of publicly accessible genomic data. DTC genetic ancestry companies also collect a wide variety of data on their consumers, including name, address, email, and in some cases information on the consumer’s family and their health and medical history. Consumers can also publish genomic data they receive on open-access platforms such as GEDMatch. Importantly, with genomic data individuals do not need to consent to law enforcement access if a relative already has provided their own consent.14 In some “Baby Doe” cases, such as Maricela Frausto’s, the match was made through a second cousin of the baby.15 In multiple cases, access to mass genetic data from public genealogy databases have allowed police to connect the “Baby Does,” as the children in these cases may be called, with the women who birthed them.16

DTC genetic ancestry companies benefit financially from the mass collection and storage of personal genomic data of consumers. Companies monetize highly sensitive personal data, sharing deidentified consumer data to pharmaceutical companies, academic researchers, and service providers. However, despite practices of deidentification of genomic data, there is growing evidence that it is often possible to reidentify individuals, even in large, anonymized datasets.17 This fact proved even more concerning in the wake of the 23andMe data breach in 2023, when more than 7 million individuals had their genomic information hacked from the company’s platform. There are similar concerns regarding the sale and acquisition of genomic data when companies are acquired or go bankrupt, such as the acquisition of Ancestry DNA by Blackstone, a venture capital firm, in 2020.18

In regards to law enforcement, DTC genetic ancestry companies have different models for cooperation with law enforcement. These companies offer either (1) minimal cooperation or (2) cooperation as a business model with exclusive services for law enforcement and cooperative data-sharing policies.19 For example, companies such as Othram specialize in forensic genetic genealogy and work with law enforcement to solve cold cases. Recently, many researchers have argued that the commercial sale of genetic data is now an explicit part of DTC genetic ancestry company policy, further amplifying concern of data privacy and consent in law enforcement practice.20 These concerns are further amplified as customers’ genomic data enters the sphere of law enforcement surveillance. Given this era of restrictive reproductive autonomy, genomic surveillance capitalism will only exacerbate the incarceration of women and pregnancy-capable people, as companies financially profit from bolstering surveillance against such people.

“What About the Fathers?”  

In only three out of the thirty-eight cases were men also charged with manslaughter and murder, although in two of these cases charges were dropped against the man.21 In October 2021, law enforcement arrested Scott Gordon Poole and Robyn Lynn Byrum after identifying them as the biological parents of a baby found near a trash can in South Nags Head, North Carolina. Police found a match with online genealogical records of the infant’s paternal grandparents and through the criminal record of the infant’s father. Both Poole and Byrum were arrested on charges of concealing the birth of a child.22 Like many other women in “Baby Doe” cases, Byrum told investigators she had not known she was pregnant until she was in the bathroom and started labor, eventually giving birth outside in her car to a stillborn infant. Poole told investigators he did not know Byrum had been pregnant and knew nothing of the birth. While Byrum accepted a plea deal for manslaughter, facing up to twenty years in prison, with a presumptive sentence of six years, Poole was arrested again for failure to show up for a court appearance in Dane County, North Carolina. Poole received twenty-four months of probation, but the charge related to the birth of the child was dropped. The imbalance of justice in these cases showcases the brunt of responsibility women bear for reproductive outcomes, regardless of their circumstances during pregnancy. Overall, in the majority of cases, only women are charged and prosecuted, and media reporting rarely mentions fathers, except to record their ignorance of a pregnancy.

Infanticide and neonaticide (killing of an infant within twenty-four hours) is most often a gendered phenomenon, with women primarily carrying out these acts. Specifically for cases of neonaticide, such as the “Baby Doe” cases, studies reveal consistent experiences of the women who commit these actions. In most cases, neonaticide is committed by young women who are single, live with their parents or caretakers, and in a majority of cases deny having knowledge of their pregnancy prior to labor.23 More than 95 percent of newborns killed during the first twenty-four hours were born not in hospitals but in places such as private bathrooms, public restrooms, parks, and hotels.24 Similarly, for cases of infanticide, women show consistent vulnerabilities in areas including mental health, economic stability, and social support.25 Factors such as shame around single or teen pregnancy, the cost of raising a child, social isolation, mental health, and poverty also contribute to infanticide.26 In addition, the lack of support from the fathers, who are often oblivious to their partner’s pregnancy, further highlights the isolation many of these women experience.

The brunt of childbearing and child-rearing responsibility lies on women, yet there is minimal structural support for mothers. Society continues to be outraged by neonaticide and infanticide yet ignores the societal challenges women face during pregnancy and motherhood.27 The lack of reproductive and mental-health care for women and pregnancy-capable people has serious repercussions for mothers, parents, and infants. There is an overemphasis on carceral punishment of women charged with these offenses. This situation is likely to only worsen given increasing surveillance of women and widespread abortion bans, restricting women from making autonomous decisions about their own bodies.

“Whose Babies Are Found? Whose Babies Are Lost?”

For many “Baby Doe” cases, more than two decades have passed since the infant’s death, yet they continue to garner mass attention from the public and from law enforcement. But why is there so much focus on individual cases of infantcide? And why does the state amass resources to solve and prosecute these women while ignoring state-sponsored forms of infanticide and child murder?

Gail Eastwood Ritchey was convicted of murder at the age of fifty-one in April 2022, almost thirty years after abandoning her newborn infant. She was twenty-two in 1993 when, unaware that she had been pregnant, she gave birth in her employer’s home. She was identified after the Geauga County, Ohio, sheriff’s department submitted DNA of the “Baby Doe” to a public genealogical website, narrowing the search to Gail Ritchey.28 Like many other women in her situation, Ritchey told police that she did not recall the baby moving or making any noise.29 She later married the newborn’s father, Mark Ritchey, who stated that he was unaware of the pregnancy till the arrest. Despite letters of support from family and friends submitted to the court, and despite Ritchey going on to raise three other children with her husband, the trial judge, David Ondrey, said of Ritchey, “calling you a monster who deserves life imprisonment is not an exaggeration.”30

In contrast, in cases where the state is responsible for infanticide and child murder, there is a lack of criminal justice response or accountability. On May 17, 2023, eight-year-old Anadith Danay Reyes Alvarez died in Border Patrol custody after staff refused to take her to the hospital multiple times.31 In May 2025, her family filed a $15 million wrongful death lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Patrol, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement; as of May 2025, litigation for the case is ongoing.32 In 2024, a report released by the US Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland, found that 973 Indigenous children died while attending federally funded boarding schools over the span of about 150 years.33 The report acknowledged the actual number of children who died while in the boarding schools was likely greater. No prosecutions occurred. In both these cases, young children were murdered, but the fundamental difference is that the state is either responsible or linked to those responsible. The state’s continued punitive attacks against vulnerable women and pregnancy-capable people, in the form of abortion and reproductive healthcare rollbacks, a lack of mental health infrastructure, and carceral punishment, further worsens the experience of pregnancy and motherhood. Yet “justice” is distorted to attack young women who are isolated and ill-supported during pregnancy. Ironically, these attacks, alongside the state’s history of violence towards children, positions the state itself as the main perpetrators of infanticide.

Closure? Or Punishment? 

The landscape of protecting reproductive autonomy has become more complex since the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision reversing Roe v. Wade.34 Since then, increasing abortion restrictions, continued attacks on reproductive and sex health education, and a precarious public health infrastructure have exacerbated health and reproductive violence against women. These realities endanger infants whose parents and their networks of support are unprepared to confront pregnancy and child-rearing. “Baby Doe” cases inform us on how the collaboration between law enforcement and biotech companies is worsening the surveillance, punishment, and control of women. To investigate and prosecute these cold cases more than two decades later seems inconsistent with the goal of using genetic genealogy to solve gruesome crimes. Instead, the use of genetic genealogy in this way, acts to reproduce carceral logics of punishment in the face of tragedy.

In the United States, reproductive injustice is shaped by surveillance, criminalization, and neglect that constrain autonomy and care. Early experiences of pregnancy marked by poverty, inadequate education, and limited access and autonomy create conditions in which infanticide takes place. Reproductive justice offers us radical and restorative alternatives to these conditions. The fight for bodily autonomy and reproductive justice is concurrent with the fight against forms of surveillance capitalism and incarceration. Alternative frameworks of care which invest in reproductive health, including access to abortion services, sex education, financial support, and mental health support, equip individuals and communities with knowledge and resources to prevent harm and offer closure. Despite the state’s investment in surveillance and carceral punishment of women as a solution to infanticide, current reproductive health conditions in the United States are likely to only worsen infant mortality. Instead, support for reproductive autonomy and health remains a key step in protecting the lives of women, pregnancy-capable people, and infants.

—

Urvi Kaul is a Kashmiri-American anthropologist, researching the intersections of power, biology, and history. They are originally from Austin, Texas, currently residing in Connecticut where they are a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Connecticut working on Kashmiri genomics and history.

Notes

  1. Isabelle Taft, “A DNA Technique is Finding Women Who Left Their Babies for Dead,” New York Times, June 3, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/03/us/forensic-genetic-geneology-dna-babies.html
  2. Christi J. Guerrini et al. “Should Police Have Access To Genetic Genealogy Databases? Capturing The Golden State Killer And Other Criminals Using A Controversial New Forensic Technique,” PLoS Biology 16, no. 10 (2018): 2,  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal
  3. Andrew Laub, “Suspect In ‘Baby India’ Case Arrested 4 Years After Georgia Newborn Was Found Abandoned In The Woods,” CBS News, May 19, 2023, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/baby-india-suspect-arrested-georgia-forsyth-county-update/; Associated Press, “Ohio Mom Gets 25 Years For Leaving Her 2 Dead Babies In Cars,” 10WBNS, September 10, 2020, https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local/ohio
  4. Taft, “A DNA Technique.”
  5. Blair Miller, “Pueblo Detectives: ‘Baby Hope’ Cold Case Solved 23 Years Later; Mother Died By Suicide In October,” Denver 7 ABC, March 9, 2020, https://www.denver7.com/news/local-news.
  6. Samantha Fischer, “Over 40 Years After Baby’s Body Found In Blaine, Police Finally Close Case,” Kare11, November 13, 2025, https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local.
  7. Caren M. Morrison, “State Abortion Bans: Pregnancy as a New Form of Coverture,” Virginia Law  Review Online 108, no. 3 (December 2022): 3 dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4255962
  8. Michelle Oberman, “Mothers Who Kill: Coming to Terms With Modern American Infanticide,” DePaul Journal of Health Law 8, no. 1 (Fall 2004): 35–9, https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1152&context=jhcl
  9. Silje Bakken and Mareile Kaufmann, “The Commercial Dynamics Of Direct-To-Consumer Genome Testing And Law Enforcement Cooperation,” New Genetics and Society 44, no. 1 (2025): 13–4,  https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2025.2527030
  10. Oliver M. Tuazon et al., “Law Enforcement Use Of Genetic Genealogy Databases In Criminal Investigations: Nomenclature, Definition And Scope,” Forensic Science International: Synergy 8 (2024): 4, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100460
  11. Daniel Kling et al., “Investigative Genetic Genealogy: Current Methods, Knowledge And Practice,” Forensic Science International: Genetics 52 (May 2021): 2, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2021.102474
  12. FBI National Press Office, “The FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) Hits Major Milestone,” Press release, May 21, 2021, https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/the-fbis-combined-dna-index-system-codis-hits-major-milestone
  13. Oliver M. Tuazon et al., “Law Enforcement,” 2.
  14. Gabrielle Samuel and Debbie Kennet, “Problematizing Consent: Searching Genetic Genealogy Databases For Law Enforcement Purposes,” New Genetics and Society 40, no. 3 (2020): 290–1, https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2020.1843149
  15. Taft, “A DNA Technique.”
  16. Dorian Geiger, “DNA Tech Leads to Mother of ‘Beloved Little Man,’ Who Was Found Abandoned and Frozen to Death 32 Years Ago, Cops Say,” Oxygen True Crime, January 17, 2020, https://www.oxygen.com/crime-news/karen-roche-identified-baby-john-doe-mother-connecticut-david-paul; Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office, “Mother Guilty in Cold-Case Homicide of ‘Baby Mary Anne,’ Will Serve Up To 20 Years in Prison,” Press Release, May 24, 2023, https://crimewatch.net/us/pa/lancaster/da/11617/post/mother-guilty-cold-case-homicide-%E2%80%9Cbaby-mary-anne%E2%80%9D-will-serve-20-years-prison; Snejana Farberov, “California Mother, 52, Is Charged In 1988 Cold-Case Murder Of Her Newborn Son Who Was Found Dead In A Paper Bag By Two Children,” DailyMail, August 4, 2020,  https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-8591903/California-mother-52-charged-1988-cold-case-murder-newborn-son-thanks-DNA-testing.html
  17. Andelka M. Phillips, “Only A Click Away – Dtc Genetics For Ancestry, Health, Love…and More: A View Of The Business And Regulatory Landscape,” Applied & Translational Genomics 8 (2016): 22,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atg.2016.01.001.
  18. Blackstone, “Blackstone Completes Acquisition of Ancestry®, Leading Online Family History Business, for $4.7 Billion,” Press Release, December 4, 2020, https://www.blackstone.com/news/press/blackstone-completes-acquisition-of-ancestry-leading-online-family-history-business-for-4-7-billion/
  19. Bakken and Kaufmann, “The Commercial Dynamics,” 12–13.
  20. Bakken and Kaufmann, “The Commercial Dynamics,” 4.
  21. CBS Pittsburgh, “Dad Sentenced in Deaths of 2 Babies Left in Abandoned Cars,” CBS News Pittsburgh, February 17, 2022, https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/dad-sentenced-in-deaths-of-2-babies-left-in-abandoned-cars/; Kylee Bond, “Murder Charges Dropped For Jefferson Parish Couple Once Accused In 1992 Death Of Baby,” WGNO New Orleans’ Very Own, May 1, 2023, https://wgno.com/news/crime/murder-charges-dropped-for-jefferson-parish-couple-once-accused-in-1992-death-of-baby/; Catherine Kozak, “Mother In Decades-Old Infant Death Case Pleads Guilty In Dare Courtroom,” News 3 WKTR, June 9, 2023, https://www.wtkr.com/news/in-the-community/northeastern-north-carolina/mother-in-decades-old-infant-death-case-pleads-guilty-in-dare-courtroom
  22. Kozak, “Mother.”
  23. Oberman, “Mothers Who Kill,” 245–6; Sylwia P. Niczewska, “Mothers Who Kill: An Overview of America’s Psychological and Legal Perspectives on Infanticide,” Journal of Forensic Psychology 5 (2019): 2, https://doi.org/10.1201/b18726-13.
  24. Niczewska, “Mothers Who Kill,” 2.
  25. Niczewska, “Mothers Who Kill,” 38.
  26. Niczewska, “Mothers Who Kill,” 85–6.
  27. Susan Ayres, “A Crazy Quilt: Infanticide in the United States,” in 100 Years of the Infanticide Act: Legacy, Impact and Future Directions, ed. Karen Brennan and Emma Milne (Hart Publishing, 2023), 247–8, https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2932&context=facscholar
  28. CBS News, “Ohio Woman Sentenced To Life In Prison, 29 Years After Newborn Son Found Dead On Road By Newspaper Carriers,” CBS News Ohio, May 22, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gail-eastwood-ritchey-life-sentence-murder-1993-death-newborn.
  29. Taft, “A DNA Technique.”
  30. CBS News, “Ohio Woman Sentenced.”
  31. Camilo Montoya-Galvez, “Official Concedes 8-Year-Old Died In U.S. Custody Could Have Been Saved As Devastated Family Recalls Final Days,” CBS News, July 20, 2023, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anadith-danay-reyes-alvarez-8-year-old-migrant-died-border-patrol.
  32. Jazmine Ulloa, “Family Seeks $15 Million in Death of Migrant Girl in U.S. Custody,” New York Times, May 1, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/01/us/migrant-girl-death-cbp-damages.html
  33. Al Jazeera,  “Nearly 1,000 Indigenous Children Died In Us Boarding Schools, Report Finds,” Al Jazeera News, July 30, 2024, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/30/nearly-1000-indigenous-children-died-in-us-boarding-schools-report-finds
  34. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022).