Genetic Testing in the Workplace

   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

While there are many benefits to genetically screening employees including the ability to capture and isolate potentially life-threatening diseases and conditions, in addition to the potential to help the employee and their family cope with

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).

A lot of controversial issues present themselves in psychology. Two topics that I will be discussing in this essay are the controversy over genetic testing and what things would be like without genetic testing. I will be describing what genetic testing is, and how it can affect an individual’s family life. I will be discussing the benefits of genetic counseling, as well as the positives without genetic counseling, and how this issue is debated in a psychological view.

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.

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

There are many questions that would arise, for example, who would have the rights to the genetic information? There are no uniform standards for genetic testing from state to state. Nor are there strict policies protecting the vulnerable. The current standard is GENA, Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, but it is severely lacking. While GENA protects against employers and health insurance companies requesting genetic test results, it does not cover mortgage lending, housing or schools, life or disability insurance. (U.S Department of Human Services). Before considering mandating genetic testing there should be clear and concise policies in place.

The Human Genome Project introduces significant scientific findings to the world, but raises a lot of controversies. Many of these controversies concern the application of this new scientific finding and its ethicality. Genetic information from a project, once aimed towards mapping the human genome in hope for curing diseases, are now being used in businesses. It shouldn’t be permissible for employers to require that all employees, as well as potential employees, be screened for genetic vulnerabilities and to use the results of such screening when they make hiring, retention, and job assignment decisions. These genetic vulnerabilities may include diseases, unsuitable personality traits and other traits the company deems undesirable. Employees shouldn’t be judged by their genes, because the results do not adequately speak for what the employees will do in life, the employee’s position in the society, and the employee’s financial standing. Genetic testing should be an option for the employees to decide on job assignment rather than influence the hiring decisions of employers. Genetic testing only shows genetic potential, not potential growth. Conducting genetic testings on employees infringes on their privacy and encourage more social gaps with genetic classes.

They (government) already have more than enough data taken from us on the web and are on the borderline of invading citizens privacy with the PATRIOT Act of 2001. With being able to see our genetic makeup, higher level corporations will want to start hiring people based on genes they think will help their business. But, if a corporation only hires one type of person, there will be no diversity or collaboration within the group since they are all the same, opposites attract. In Gattaca, nobody is friendly to one another, and that could be due to the fact that they are all similar and they are the type of people that are introverted. There is also the problem of discriminating based on the genetic makeup of a person.

Therefore, in 2008, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act prohibit discrimination on the basis of genetic information with respect to health insurance and employment. Employer cannot refuse to hire, or to discharge, any employee because of genetic information. In addition, it is unlawful to request, require or purchase genetic information of the employee (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2008). However, even with genetic non-discrimination legislation, mutation carriers may find themselves ineligible for life insurance and other long-term

I agree that a disadvantage to genetic testing may result in discrimination. After learning more about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, I find it interesting that the law not only restricts genetic information but also includes one’s individual and family medical history (NIH, 2014). The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act took effect in 2009, and also resulted in amendments to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act in 2013, to clarify genetic information as health information (NIH, 2014). Another interesting fact regarding the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act is that it does not cover government based health insurers, such as military, veteran, or federal employee health benefits (NIH,

Personal DNA testing is not completely accurate and can cause unnecessary stress. This tool is relatively new and needs further developments to be completely reliable. I realize that people give their consent to get tested, but is it fair to offer such an unreliable test? I am sure people have taken their lives over the results from genetic testing because it scared them to death. Nothing should ever make people feel like they are not worth living for. This procedure was designed to allow individuals to prevent diseases that they were unaware of. Although, it may have done the opposite. To add, the cost is unreasonable for the average person. It is important for people to consider the consequences and benefits of such a practice before giving consent. I will recommend this video to my friends or family who consider personal DNA testing. I think Neil Tyson touched on some very great points that are worth

Government official should regulate consumers’ genetic testing kits before distribution to the public. Most definitely, without further intensify investigation on over the counter genetic testing kits; it would create further harm to the public. Also, consumer education is very important to also avoid future harm from genetic testing. Consumers should become aware that genetic testing flaws. Therefore, physicians should not sugar cold genetic testing, but educate the patient of genetic testing pros and cons. For example, mothers who use genetic testing should be aware of flaws in genetic test, to prevent an unnecessary

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