Should your genes rule your life?
With the development of projects such as the Human Genome Project and the explosion of new technology, we have never known more about the DNA that makes each and every one of us unique. While being able to find this information has been able to help thousands of people discover their roots, possible diseases, and practically anything else they would want to know, many fear that insurance companies and possible employers will use their genome against them when deciding to hire or cover them.
In 2009, congress passed a law, GINA (Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act), that made genetic discrimination illegal in health insurance and in the workplace. This act covers most situations in which genetic discrimination could be present, but not all. The situations/contexts in which discrimination are allowed allowed are: If a business has less than 15 employees, those in the military, those receiving health benefits through the Veterans Health Administration or Indian Health Service, and in every type of insurance besides health insurance. (U.S. National Library of Medicine)
Most of these seem reasonable, but not covering those receiving veterans benefits leaves a hole in the net. As the men and women who risked their lives to protect our country, why should veterans be any less protected than the average citizen? This raises a further question of should anyone be less/more protected than anyone else? This debate has been raging in the U.S. for years, with no real decision being made. On the one hand, being able to get help when having health issues seems like something everyone should have, but on the other hand having private insurance serves as a major boost to the economy. While it is unclear which side is the right choice, veteran benefits are something that this debate should not apply to. Going off the definition of “benefit” Veterans benefits should give them an advantage when it comes to insurance, yet veterans choosing to receive benefits from the VHA are being denied the protection guaranteed to the general public under GINA.
So back to the main point; should genetic discrimination be allowed? In my opinion, Genetic discrimination should be allowed while hiring employees, but not in the insurance industry. The main goal of a business is to make money and to maximize profits. If a business needs as many employees as possible to be working at any given time to achieve this goal, it is only logical to hire someone who is predisposed to not get sick as often versus someone who is predisposed to have a weaker immune system and is therefore going to be available less to work (Bioethics Education Project). This results in those without a job not having access to the insurance provided by the company, resulting in potential “backdoor” genetic discrimination in insurance, which complicates things further. All the same, this only occurs in jobs that offer insurance to employees, so it is not a guaranteed problem. Nevertheless, having access to candidates’ genomes allows not only businesses but the entire economy to flourish and grow.
The problem is, it’s not that simple. While the rest of the economy is flourishing, those candidates not chosen for the job are left without an income and without the insurance provided by their would-be employer. This once again comes back to the “Right vs. Privilege” debate raging in the U.S. over healthcare. Seeing as companies would be using genetic information to choose one candidate over another, it seems logical to use that same information to support the latter candidate. If one’s genetic code says that they are very likely to develop cancer at some point in their life, it seems only logical to provide them with healthcare that is ready to help them fight it. It follows then that insurance companies should not use one’s genetic code against them, but rather as the template by which they create an effective healthcare plan that protects the individual from the health issues that will most likely occur in their life. With the main goal of insurance being to protect against the unexpected, It is only logical to use genetic information to further this goal rather than detract from it.
To conclude, Genetic discrimination is contradictory to the goals of insurance companies, while also being a viable tool in the selection process for businesses. Instead of using genetic code against their potential insurees, insurance companies should use it to create an accurate policy that addresses any potential issues the genetic tests found. In the workplace setting, genetic discrimination can serve as the deciding factor between candidates; if one is predisposed to be able to stay focused for longer periods of time, they are a better candidate for any position than someone who is predisposed to be distracted easily. In this way, every sector of business can maximize their efficiency, giving the economy as a whole a boost.
