May 07, 2008 05:53PM GMT
Question
•
Politics - United States
Do you agree with congress in banning use of DNA tests for insurance rates?
Congress sent President Bush a bill Thursday forbidding employers and insurance companies from using genetic tests showing people are at risk of developing cancer, heart disease or other ailments to reject their job applications, promotions or health care coverage, or in setting premiums. Bush was expected soon to sign the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, which lawmakers and advocates called "the first major civil rights act of the 21st century." Federal law already bans discrimination by race and gender.Researchers supported the bill because Americans have been refusing to take genetic tests or have been using false names and paying cash because they didn't want the information used against them by their employer or insurance company.VIEW FULL ARTICLE
Loading...-
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
Pre-screening for health insurance will only lead to higher premiums for "at-risk" people, and outright rejection of others based on "inferior" genes. There is no way to know if someone will definitely get a disease or not, even if a disease is classified as "congenital". They could block entire families, including as-yet unborn children from receiving health care in the future, based on the genetic traits of the parents. Once you are classified, your entire lineage, including near relatives, could be disqualified, or forced to pay huge premiums. I don't care what legislation is passed. When has legislation ever produced protection from insurance companies? I'm very suspicious of this. For all we know, the insurance companies are pushing for this "Act" themselves, because it contains inherent loopholes that will allow them to do exactly as they want. Who are these "researchers, advocates, and lawmakers" introducing the bill? Who funded the research? I'm going to do some checking on this. -
I knew it! The full article says it all. The "research" was conducted by the
National Human Genome Research Institute, and the bill is sponsored by the insurance companies.
"Health insurance plans are committed to protecting the privacy of patients while ensuring that they have continued access to high quality health care services in the emerging field of genetic medicine," said Karen Ignagni, president and CEO of America's Health Insurance Plans, a national association representing nearly 1,300 companies providing health insurance coverage to more than 200 million Americans. "This legislation advances this principle."
They want to establish a nationwide DNA database for every citizen in the US, and this is how they want to do it, through legislation disguised as a "protection". Sickening. The article also says:
Genetic testing also will help doctors catch problems early, perhaps leading to preventive treatment and lower medical costs. Once the president signs the bill, people "should do it and get it done right away," said Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y.
The House voted 414-1 for the legislation Thursday, a week after it passed the Senate on a 95-0 vote. The only member of Congress to vote against the bill was Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas.
I'm gonna have to go with Ron on this one. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
and employees.
With the advances in knowledge of how certain genes (or alterations of them) can cause, or make a person susceptable to, certain diseases there is a danger of people being denied a job or insurance coverage through no fault of their own. A person should be able to take use the results of genetic tests to improve medical treatment knowing that genetic defects will not jeopardize their employment or their insurability. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
Your Health information should remain private, just as your credit info should. They are already using your credit info to base premiums on. Who are these people that want to play GOD? Give them this and they will be deciding who lives or dies. Or maybe as you get to retirement age, they will feel your quality of life will not count. We Need LESS Government, not more. I do not want Government making decisions in my private life. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
I don't think that employers should even be allowed to ask for a genetic test. Talk about invasion of privacy. And as far as health insurance, it just shows that a risk-based premium system is the wrong way to go about paying for health care. Those people who are most at risk for disease should have access to the preventitive health care they need, not shut out of the system because they are too risky to insure. -
I worry that they will not consider your DNA to be a "health record". Maybe they'll classify it as "personal information", which is protected by the right to privacy, but still available when "necessary" to health insurance companies, license branches, banks, schools, and other "officials", on request.
-
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
I do agree with that. Your health information is private, and that privacy is protectecd by law...that law should also apply to any possible future health issues that you may or may not end up with. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
Genetic testing should be between you and your physician and be PRIVATE. It is no one's business what your genetic profile is. We are finding that having a genetic predisposition to certain disease or mutation does not necessarily translate that is will present itself in your lifetime or your offspring. Why? Because many genes require a trigger, it may be environmental, it may be a genetic trigger that is missing or dormant. So you may be a genetic carrier of a blood disorder, but lack the triggering gene to develop the disorder. We are still in our infancy in biotechnology and genetics. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
We dont know enough about these things that they should be used in this manner. Just because you have a supposed genetic predisposition doesnt mean you will end up with it. Lifestyle choices have a lot larger effect than anything else-for good or bad. And honestly if they tell me I probably will have heart disease at an early age and die earlier, I dont want to know that -
Answered No. I don't agree with any of this
The government is rapidly becoming a police state. In fact, it is one now, legally, via signing statements and Cheney/Bush policies and procedures. Where is privacy today? Who feels free to roam anonymously anymore, for instance? No one. We are watched, listened to, and recorded everywhere. Where will it end? In Orwell's "1984" and soon. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
Genetic information should be private. Insurance companys will look for any reason to limit their liability and would deny coverage to many people who may not necesarrily ever get ill. It is apalling to think that you could be discriminated against based on a disease you might get in the future or may never get. -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
genetic predisiposition does not mean that you would absolutely develope that condition. It is just another way for the greedy insurance B_______ to jack up the already high premimuns and increase their profit -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
I care about people who need medical care, I don't care one way or the other about employers though we should be fair to them: I care a good deal that we do something about th greedy insurance CEOs who are getting fat by controlling access to medical care. They have no business making merchandise of medical care, and that we let them do it is abominable and blasphemous. Single-payer government health care such as the civilized world has is what we need. -
I see your point. But I think insurance companies are making out just fine without this extra perk. If the law was not passed, I would hate to see what would happen to people who got bad luck in terms of their genes- they would get no coverage and have a hard time finding jobs.
-
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
If you have the possiblity of getting cancer, having a heart attack, etc. The employer could fire you for this reason-of course, they'd use something else!
And no insurance company would cover you, ever...it's not good for their bottom line! -
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
I agree with the ban. Not because it would help employers, but because it would hurt employees. There is a serious loss of equal opportunity if people can be punished financially because of hypothetical genetic predisposition.
![Chris [Ninja]™](http://images.sodahead.com/images/profiles/0/0/0/2/9/6/7/8/4/profiles_n3311696390390541354_5742_109876_media_small.jpeg)
Answered Yes. Genetic bias legislation could help employers
I don't think that employers should even be allowed to ask for a genetic test. Talk about invasion of privacy. And as far as health insurance, it just shows that a risk-based premium system is the wrong way to go about paying for health care. Those people who are most at risk for disease should have access to the preventitive health care they need, not shut out of the system because they are too risky to insure.