What is the ethical thing to do? How should the scientists handle these sorts of situations? Could these teams benefit from other types of non-scientist specialists to help mitigate these sorts of situations?

Background
DNA information has brought up several ethical dilemmas in the context of mass disasters and mass fatalities. For example, before DNA was available to make positive identifications, presumptive identifications were made based on clothing, context, or the forensic anthropology reports. If the organization leading these investigations later, through DNA technology, realizes that a body was misidentified but was already returned to the family, buried, etc., informing the family may cause increased emotional distress and disrupt any peace they gained from closure. On the other hand, keeping the information means that the family is misled.
An alternative scenario that has also happened is that DNA results have positively identified human remains as a particular individual. However, when the scientists have told the surviving family members of this identification, the individuals claimed that they didn’t believe the DNA results because they were sure their loved ones were simply missing and not dead.

Question
What is the ethical thing to do? How should the scientists handle these sorts of situations? Could these teams benefit from other types of non-scientist specialists to help mitigate these sorts of situations?