Let's salute that H.R. 493, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, passed Congress yesterday. Only three Representatives, all Republicans, voted against it.
If voted into law, GINA would prevent health insurers to discriminate against individuals whose DNA who show that they are likely to develop a disease, or a physical condition, and thus would be a liability for the insurers. "A group health plan, or a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, shall not adjust premium or contribution amounts for a group on the basis of genetic information concerning an individual in the group or a family member of the individual (including information about a request for or receipt of genetic services by an individual or family member of such individual).’’
GINA would also prevent employers to discriminate against employees: "It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any employee, or otherwise to discriminate against any employee with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the employee, because of genetic information with respect to the employee (or information about a request for or the receipt of genetic services by such employee or family member of such employee); or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify the employees of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any employee of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the status of the employee as an employee, because of genetic information with respect to the employee (or information about a request for or the receipt of genetic services by such employee or family member of such employee).
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any employee, or otherwise to discriminate against any employee with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the employee, because of genetic information with respect to the employee (or information about a request for or the receipt of genetic services by such employee or family member of such employee); or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify the employees of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any employee of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the status of the employee as an employee, because of genetic information with respect to the employee (or information about a request for or the receipt of genetic services by such employee or family member of such employee).
The 9th Circuit held ten years ago, in Norman-Bloodsaw et al. v. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory that an employer who had requested prospective employees to provide blood sample and then had the the blood tested for syphilis, sickle cell trait, and pregnancy, had thus violated the employee's right of privacy. Refusing to provide such samples would prevent the candidate to be hired. Judge Reinhardt wrote in the opinion: "One can think of few subject areas more personal and more likely to implicate privacy interests than that of one's health or genetic make-up."
Since sickle cell trait are more likely to be found in African-Americans, DNA testing, if authorized, would allow employers to use an economic excuse to refuse to hire members of certain ethnic groups.
For more information on genetic discrimination, see the National Human Genome Institute site.
No comments:
Post a Comment