New Jersey Sued for Maintaining ‘Creepy Database’ of Baby Blood

A father and a mother look at their newborn son at the maternity of the Diaconesses hospital in Paris, on Nov. 17, 2020. Martin Bureau/AFP via Getty Images

New Jersey is being sued for maintaining a blood sample database of babies without parental consent. The state allegedly has “no limit” on how it uses the blood.

Shortly after birth, every baby born in New Jersey is screened for diseases, which involves taking blood from the newborns. “The problem, however, is with what New Jersey doesn’t tell parents,” the Nov. 2 class action lawsuit states. “After the newborn screening is completed, some blood remains unused. New Jersey keeps that blood from every baby born in the state for 23 years, all without parents’ knowledge or consent. It gets even worse. Not only does New Jersey secretly hold onto the blood for decades, it can use the blood however it wants. There is simply no limit to what New Jersey can do with the blood.”

The lawsuit was filed by three parents. Two of the plaintiffs are Erica and Jeremiah Jedynak, a married couple with a son. At birth, the state took blood from their son.

The lawsuit claims that NJ “still has the blood” and “never asked Jedynaks whether it could keep their child’s unused blood after the testing was completed.” Ms. Erica was “horrified and disgusted when she learned that New Jersey was keeping her son’s blood in a state facility for what she describes as ‘a creepy database.’”

The third plaintiff, Reverend Hannah Lovaglio, was “appalled” at learning that blood samples from her two young boys were being kept by NJ. “Now, Hannah worries about how New Jersey may be abusing its possession of her children’s blood.”

The lawsuit alleges that New Jersey does not simply keep the unused blood, but has been “caught giving baby blood” to third parties.

It cited a case that revealed that the state gave samples from its newborn blood stockpile to law enforcement officers “on multiple occasions.” In these instances, “the officers did not have a warrant to take the blood.”

“On information and belief, New Jersey also gives or sells blood from its baby blood stockpile to other third parties. This could include, but is not limited to, researchers, companies, or other government agencies.”

Constitutional Violations

The lawsuit points out that the Fourth Amendment guarantees an individual the right to be secure against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” As such, a search or seizure without a warrant or content would be deemed unconstitutional.

The retention of blood from newborns during the disease screening program without a warrant or informed consent would thus violate the Fourth Amendment of the plaintiffs.

“Furthermore, parents have a fundamental due process right to raise their children without undue state interference.” A parent’s right over their children includes the right to make medical decisions on the kids’ behalf, the lawsuit argued.

New Jersey strips away these rights from parents “without a compelling reason” to do so. “As such, New Jersey’s retention of the blood violates Plaintiff Parents’ fundamental rights under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.”

The lawsuit asked the court to declare New Jersey’s practice of retaining the blood of newborns as unconstitutional and to prohibit the state from doing so unless it obtains informed consent from parents.

All 50 U.S. States and the District of Columbia require blood screening for newborns.

“What makes New Jersey’s program so uniquely disturbing is the complete lack of safeguards for future abuse and the lack of consent, which leave the program ripe for abuse,” said Christie Heber, an attorney at the libertarian law firm Institute of Justice (IJ), according to a Nov. 2 press release.

IJ helped the three parents file the lawsuit. “It’s not right that the state can enter an incredibly intimate moment, the tender days of childbirth, and take something from our children, which is then held on to for 23 years,” said Ms. Hannah.

Blood Retention in Other States

New Jersey isn’t the first state to be legally challenged over the unconstitutional retention of baby blood. Multiple other states have previously been successfully sued. A 2009 lawsuit in Texas forced the state to destroy 5.3 million blood samples collected from babies.

According to the Texas Health and Human Services (HHS), the state now maintains the blood samples of newborns only for up to two years unless permitted by a parent or guardian.

“If the parent gives their OK on the Parent Decision Form for Storage and Use of Newborn Screening Blood Spots, the residual blood spots may be stored safely for up to 25 years,” per the HHS.

“No matter the parent’s choice, no information that can identify them or their child can be released outside DSHS (Department of State Health Services) without additional written consent.”

In 2014, the state of Minnesota agreed to destroy blood samples taken from 1.1 million newborn infants as part of a settlement in a lawsuit filed by 21 families.

Last year, Michigan’s health department agreed to destroy over 3 million blood samples stored in Lansing. The lawsuit in the matter is still ongoing.

All three states also shared the blood samples with third parties. Texas was accused of giving samples to the federal government to build a secret DNA database that was supposed to be used while investigating crimes.

Minnesota handed over blood samples to medical researchers who then used them in several studies. Meanwhile, Michigan sold them to companies for research purposes.