Toothprints: Mixed impressions

David Kihara

Thursday, Nov. 24, 2005 | 7:52 a.m.

One of the newest devices for identifying lost or missing kids in Southern Nevada also is stirring debate nationwide, with critics questioning its value and whether it provides, at best, false comfort for parents.

The devices, known as Toothprints, are small plastic wafers that make impressions of children's teeth after the boy or girl bites down on it. The impression also captures some of the child's DNA, which can be used to help scent-tracking dogs locate the child or, in the worst case scenario, to identify a dead child.

"Hopefully, these will never be used, but if they are, it's a good tool," said local dentist Adam Berskey, who sells the devices for $5 from his office on Sahara Avenue. Berskey said he has "toothprinted" his 8-year-old daughter and 6-year-old son.

Several police departments have endorsed the devices, including the Metuchen Police Department in New Jersey and the Mesa Police Department in Arizona.

"Anything that can help ID kids is a good thing," said Det. Mike Kilker of the Metuchen Police Department.

Toothprints is the latest in a line of child identification products to hit the market. Others include home DNA testing kits and computer software, given away by some companies, that immediately transmits information about child abductors from the Amber alert system -- the law enforcement notification system that informs the public about serious abduction cases.

One company, Code Amber, provides a scrolling ticker of amber alerts. The service is free, but Code Amber asks for a $3 donation to "help us support and continue to build the program," according to the codeamber.org Web site.

While the devices provide a sense of security to parents, whether they are effective in helping to find or identify missing kids is another matter.

Toothprints, for example, is not endorsed by Metro Police. Metro Sgt. Thomas Wagner, of the missing person detail, questioned whether dental impressions left by a child would be effective in identifying a missing youth five or 10 years later, after the child's teeth have changed.

"A baby tooth is different than an adult tooth," he said.

Instead, the department provides fingerprinting services and the Children's Identification and Location Database, a nationwide registry that uses iris scans to help identify lost or abducted children.

The American Board of Forensic Odontology, the certification board of forensic dentists in the United States and Canada, takes a similar view to Wagner's.

In September 2004, the board released a paper warning that devices like Toothprints are of "limited value when used for the dental identification of children."

Toothprint devices might not help identify kids because children's mouths change as the boy or girl matures, and even things like basic orthodontistry could alter a child's mouth, the paper notes. The board stated that other means, such as X-rays, provide better, more detailed information.

Susan Barnett, marketing coordinator of Kerr Corporation, the makers of Toothprints, said that the company recommends getting an updated impression of a child's mouth every six months.

"This is only one tool in an arsenal of tools," she said.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the national non-profit group that supplies information about missing children, neither endorses Toothprints not steers parents away from the product, said senior case manager Jerry Nance.

Nance said any device that could help in identifying a missing child -- and provide some relief to worried parents -- is a good thing.

"We are for any form of ID with a scientific basis ... as long as it doesn't cost an arm and a leg," he said.

David Kihara can be reached at 259-2330 or at davidk@lasvegassun.com.