When applying for a job, there are always those phrases the human resource folks use to make sure the company doesn’t get sued for discrimination. People can’t be kept from a job they are skilled for because of things like gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc.
Now there’s a new category on the horizon. The House just cleared legislation for a Genetic Information Discrimination Act (GINA). With genetic records and gene testing becoming a normal way for doctors to test for potential health problems, or gather a complete profile of a person’s health, maybe this isn’t such a bad idea.
“GINA will do more than stamp out a new form of discrimination,” said Louise Slaughter (D-New York) who introduced the bill. “It will allow us to realize the tremendous potential of genetic research without jeopardizing one of the most fundamental privacies that can be imagined.”
Okay. More privacy tends to be a good thing, in my mind. The article does state that some people haven’t had genetic testing done because they are afraid of what the medical centers or even the government might do with the information gathered. It’s one thing to know our internet surfing habits and phone call records, but to also have access to the details of our very genetic structure? Admittedly, genetic discrimination is not a common occurrence at the moment. You aren’t going to be required to get a DNA test to get into college or work the drive-through…but maybe someday? What if workplaces started screening people who had genetic predispositions to certain diseases, or who were born with a disorder? Could genetic purity/impurity become yet another way people divvy up social status?
This follows up with the most recent novel by Michael Crichton, Next, in which he explored the potential abuses and missuses of genetic information, patented genetic structure, and the manipulation of genetic codes, and how this all might affect our society in the decades to come. One example from this story is a man whose immune system is found to fight cancer rather effectively. This man’s doctor sells physical samples to a multi-billion genetic corporation in order to develop into a more widespread treatment. A stormy legal battle ensues over whether an individual has a right to the privacy of their own body. At least it looks like a law will be enacted that is a step toward protecting that most basic of rights.
I see that smile.
There is this movie, Gattaca, which showcases the problems that could arise if DNA testing became commonplace for jobs and such. My microbiology teacher had us watch it. It goes along with the trend of genetic manipulation or engineering of babies to be to prevent diseases and such.
Good movie, Gattaca, and a perfect illustration of what this article is talking about. There’s another article I saw that I should dig up on this as well. It spoke about the possibility of reversing the trend of genetic manipulation for the betterment of a child. What if say, a set pf parents who were little people wanted to genetically adjust their children so they would be little as well, rather than growing to average sizes? Do parents have that right, either way?