Genetic discrimination is judgement based on one’s genetic characteristics or chromosomes. In 2008, the “Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act” (GINA) was passed, this act would prohibit discrimination based on genetics; moreover, GINA would prevent employers and health insurance providers from increasing health insurance rates based on one’s genetic disposition, which I will discuss further. In this paper, I will discuss the key purpose of GINA, summarize the five congressional findings that impelled the formation of GINA.
The purpose of GINA is to prevent genetic discrimination from insurance companies and employers. Genetic discrimination occurs when one judged based on their genetic characteristics or DNA. Mainly GINA was implemented to safeguard the public from discrimination and eliminate anxiety about discrimination to promote the use of genetic testing, research, and therapy.
Before GINA was passed, there were five discoveries made by congress, these discoveries would be the driving force for GINA to be passed. Initially, Congress found human genetic testing to be profitable to the public, new breakthroughs through genetic testing and research would prevent and cure some illnesses and diseases.
Sterilization laws were very prominent in early research, in 1905 Indiana passed laws
…show more content…
In contrast GINA do not protect against factors such as gender, or race as these elements are covered under the Civil Rights Act. The text describes three elements covered under GINA which include “an individual’s genetic test results, information pertaining to the genetic test results of an individual’s family members, and information about the patient’s family history of genetic disease and disorder,” (Bustillos,
I support the guidelines outlined by Kitcher for the use of genetic information because of their responsible and ethical nature. I believe that future generations will benefit as a direct consequence of these guidelines. I shall begin by defining eugenics as the study of human genetics to improve inherited characteristics of the human race by the means of controlled selective breeding.
There are two main ways genetic testing places a constraint on a child’s right to an open future. The first of these is that the revelation of a child’s disease status can change his life narrative and the way parents and others treat him, and substantially alter his or her life’s trajectory (Davis _____). Parents may feel guilty or shelter their not-yet-sick
Through studies such as the Human Genome Project, researchers have discovered more information than ever about genes, chromosomes, DNA, and specific medical conditions and diseases. Although, we cannot hold modern medicine responsible for discovering biological markers and treatments for certain medical conditions, historical events such as Buck v. Bell need to be brought into the classroom for students to understand how linking complex human traits and behaviors to heredity is erroneous and may lead to unjustifiable social policies. Human traits and behaviors are more so based upon an individual’s environment rather than the genes an individual inherits. Many historians worry that contemporary economic and social problems can give rise to a new eugenics movement. Given the constant struggle over limited resources, we can expect eugenic proposals to resurface overtime. The story of Carrie Buck provides a point of departure for discussing and understanding multifaceted issues including the understanding of linking traits to certain behavioral aspects, the understanding of the legislative system and court rulings and understanding what decisions and when these decisions should be justifiable to people within society. Providing education on such controversial and political issues to future generations could
The inclusion of genetic testing into Electronic Health Records impacts the overall healthcare of patient’s because it informs the physicians and other medical professionals the selection of effective treatment or preventive action. A manager’s responsibilities are to implement policies to protect the confidentiality, privacy, and security of genetic tests results and information of patient’s. Policies contributing to potential discrimination acts are also advised because genetic/genomic testing reveals a patient’s physical characteristics.
In Improvements in Prenatal Genetic Testing Raise Ethnic Issues, R. J. Crayton produced an article about prenatal testing and whether or not parents should be allowed to have these tests done. First the situation of a high risk baby who will have a disability or defect after birth, so the parents decide to abort the child is being viewed as an inequality to the disabled community. Secondly, certain adoptions are put on hold since the biological parents chose to not carry the unborn child through the entire pregnancy, however, the surrogate mother wants to carry the child through the entire term. Lastly, research shows that the results can be a false positive, so unintentionally the parents decide not to keep the unknown, but healthy baby.
The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be
Many medical advances are being made today in the area of genetics. One of the most talked about is prenatal genetic testing. The purpose of prenatal genetic testing is to obtain information on a baby's health before they are born. This new technology will definitely improve the quality of human life. Diseases will be diminished and through new advances some diseases might even be eliminated. Children will be at less risk to have major health problems in their lives adding positively to their life experience. Prenatal genetic testing will also affects society as a whole.
Laws like GINA should be improved to allow citizens to have more privacy with their genetic information.
Genetic information can be identified at any point throughout a person’s lifespan from pre-conception until after death. In addition to heritable, biological information, family history, genetic test results, and medical records are also sources of genetic information” (Jenkins & Lea, 2005). We are put in a position to gather and retain information that could be utilized for a better future, but is confidentiality involved for the sake of profiting? Ask yourself, who should have access to genetic information? Who owns and controls it? How can families resolve conflicts when some members want to be tested for a genetic disorder and others do not?
The benefits of genetic science for society is for employers who want to know if their employers are in excellent working condition and if the worker will cause them more money when obtaining health insurance. If an employer hires someone that that is healthy then the cost of health insurance does not rise and the employee will not have to downgrade their health insurance plan so that they can accommodate the employee that is not healthy. The limitations of genetic science for society are the possibility of genetic testing causing safety issues at work, the development of a genetic low class, the breach of privilege and confidentiality, and the utilization of genetic bias to excuse different methods of discrimination (Krumm, 2002).
Whether an employer or health insurance company should have access to your genetic information can one day be the difference between having a job and health insurance to having neither. Even though it’s prohibited for an employers to ask or request for genetic information there will be people who voluntary provide that information. Those who do provide genetic information might be doing themselves more harm than good. Many are against providing their genetic information as they fear it could lead to genetic discrimination and prevent them from acquiring the proper insurance needed to cover health problems or obtain employment (National, 2002). To prevent genetic discrimination laws like “The Americans with Disabilities Act” (ADA), “The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act” (GINA), and “Affordable Care Act” (ACA) have been passed to prevent insurance companies from denying coverage or increasing rates, employers from denying work, prohibit discrimination in public services areas, and prohibits the discrimination against those who need accommodations (National, 2017). While providing genetic information is not required, some employers feel that’s its necessary to have this information. If an employer is are able to access a person genetic information they can to determine whether the person poses a risk to themselves or to those around them (Midwest, n.d).
Genetic profiling is a contemporary issue relating to the individual and technology which restricts access to unbiased decisions and privacy. Genetic profiling interferes with the individuals bodily, genetic and behavioural privacy, as it can be used for the benefit of identifying bodies to using the results of a DNA test to choose whether to employ one individual over another, due to future concerns. It can easily be argued that genetic profiling is in the need of law reform as a result of legal implications and the lack of individual’s rights.
2. Is it right to use genetic screening as a tool to keep tabs on their prospective enrollees?
Although genetic testing can benefit society in numerous ways, such as the diagnosis of vulnerabilities to inherited diseases and ancestry verification, it also has the precarious capability to become a tool in selecting a more favorable genetic makeup of an individuals and ultimately cloning humans. Genetic testing will depreciate our quality of life and may result in discrimination, invasion of privacy, and harmful gene therapy.
The fear of genetic discrimination is a phobia gripping many people around the world. People find themselves asking, could my genetic information raise my health bills? Could this cause me to be rejected from a job opportunity? These anxieties are causing people to lash out at genetic research, and ultimately the human genome project. People do not want our understanding of human genomics to advance. This is because the risks of the development of the technology could inflict on them. A major risk is genetic discrimination. I believe that genetic discrimination is wrong and governments should continue to prevent it because it is an invasion of privacy, it violates equity, and it could really hurt people with genetic