Genetic Discrimination: What Is The Key Purpose Of GINA?

Just as most bioethicists and medical professionals agree that genetic testing for curable or preventable diseases is beneficial to patients, they also agree that genetic testing for incurable and untreatable diseases, such as Alzheimer's, is useless (Hubbard & Wald, 1999; Ridley, 1999). Although a negative test may afford a person the reassurance that he or she will not develop the disease, a positive test could be a death sentence. For example, since 1986 people who are at risk for Huntington's disease have had the option of being tested for the mutation on chromosome 4 that is linked to the disease (Ridley, 1999). In Genome, Nancy Wexler, a woman who set out to identify the Huntington's gene in the late 1970s, relates the story of a woman who asked doctors whether or not she had Huntington's disease (Ridley, 1999). Although the doctors found that the woman was showing subtle signs of the disease, she could not detect these signs herself. The doctors, rather than telling the woman that she had the disease, let her believe that she was well and did not have Huntington's disease. After the woman left the doctors' office, the woman's friend came into the office and asked the doctors what they had said to the woman, because earlier the woman had told her friend that she

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.

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.

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.

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).

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

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

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.

Laws like GINA should be improved to allow citizens to have more privacy with their genetic information.

A few months ago I watched a movie called Gattaca, which dealt with the issue of genetic discrimination in the near future. In the movie, people were separated into two classes, those that were genetically screened and positively altered before birth and the class that was unaltered. The separate classes had stark divisions, from what jobs that you were able to apply for to where you could eat. Security was aimed at keeping unaltered people away from the enhanced people. Knowledge about who and what you are was done by "instant" genetic genotyping that tells anyone everything that they want to know about a person’s genome from a small sample of blood or a hair

Basically the article claims that everyone is impacted by genetic testing, either positively or negatively. There are many potential benefits which can arise as a result of genetic testing such as individuals that are identified as carrying potentially harmful genetic alterations can receive regular

only lead to discrimination with insurance coverage but also with employers. Once the genetic information is part of the individual’s medical record, it may then be accessed by others. Cases of employers having used genetic information as part of the selection process have been found in Australia. Genetic discrimination has even been detected in the armed forces where a young man was asked to provide documentation that showed he was not predisposed to Marfan syndrome, of which he had a family history. Genetic discrimination is probably the biggest concern for individuals when it comes to the cause and effects of genetic testing upon society. Some of this concern roots from the extreme examples of world leaders and prevalent scientists in the

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 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

2. Is it right to use genetic screening as a tool to keep tabs on their prospective enrollees?