January 19, 2011
Yes. And we are hearing about it again as the Congress considers health care reform…yet again.
Insurance discrimination… 
Parents are worried once more as Congress talks about health care reform and it seems as if some conditions might not be eligible for care. It is hard to understand why a conditon that someone is born with might be ruled out for care, while a condition that has direct links to our personal behavior would be covered… We don’t want to find ourselves playing a ‘blame’ game… but resources are limited. We have somepersonal responsibility. Society has some responsibility. We have to consider both.
Employment discrimination… A subtle thing can happen, subtle because it is hidden from view. As costs for health care increase, as medical knowledge grows, will there be some conditions that rule us out of consideration for employment?? Will some genetic conditions linked to risk from some diseases lead some employers to require testing for those genes? What do the innovators of ’23 and me’ think about these issues?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7UHBBHhoj0&feature=related
Social discrimination. We have years of evidence to support that naming or labeling health conditions can lead to stigmatizing behavior toward people who have been labeled…avoidance and more.
Reproductive discrimination… Yes. How we talk about health can cause discrimination…
In reference to Katie’s post, I think she makes a very interesting point right off the bat. With all of the problems and debating going on with today’s health care, it is very interesting that illnesses that people are defenseless against are not covered, but illnesses that are self inflicted are. I think that in order to fix the health care mess of today, addressing this issue should be the first step taken.
I find this topic of genetic discrimination very interesting. With how new this technology is, I feel like there is not enough known to be able to completely determine if someone is born with a terminal illness such as cancer or diabetes. I also noticed that in the movie, during the part when the interviewer asked the question about whether or not his insurance company would be able to see if cancer was in his genetics, I felt the two ladies did their best to avoid answering the question. Yes, they did say that there are many factors that play into whether a person develops cancer or not, but they did also not rule out the possibility that a person will discover whether they have a cancer gene or not. Also, I am very skeptical to how private this information really is. I feel as though if all of this information is on the internet there are ways for other people to obtain it. The best bet would be if you are worried that an insurance company, or anyone else for that matter, will use this information to discriminate against you, just stay away from it until more is known.
I felt that the video shared a way to help out more precisely what should be covered by health care. This can help clear much of the grey area on what people really need to be covered by health care. Even though this is a good way to solve some of the problems it still wont clear all of the issues that are related to this predicament. On the other hand, it thought it was very cool with what they can do with the genetic tests such as finding distant cousins. I also felt the whole procedure was fascinating in itself. Referring to Katie Krauss’ post, I find her point just in saying that it is sad that some illnesses that some may not be able to control may not be covered in insurance. These are the exact grey areas that we need to work on in this system. It is necessary.
In reference to Katie’s post concerning genetic testing in 2014. I agree that this subject is only going to become more popular before the new health care bill. I feel that government needs to stand a stance, and insurance companies should have to cover condition if they are determined a preexisting condition. This also brings up a good point of whether or no there will be a day when genetic testing is mandatory. This will introduce a whole new debate. What will be required for insurance to cover preexisting conditions?
The fact that health care is only good for certain issues related to health is a gray area in itself. Although it is hard to determine what is necessary to be covered and what is not covered in health insurance there are some reasons why some situations should be reviewed. This issue obviously deals with the political element due to what our government issues under health care itself. Dealing with social justice i believe that our government tries to make it as equal to everyone as possible, but it is impossible to be fair to everyone in our country (not that it is the right way) but this situation is always in need of improvement. This also goes along with procedural justice
I think Katie’s post is right on the money. There are some doctors who are solely motivated by maximizing their profits. This allows for many issues to arise in relation to this genetic testing. I believe that these issues are also expressed in Aimee’s comment about being possibly discriminated against for having high risk genes. I feel like the fears that Aimee mentions are all to common in the general public. These fears often lead to the mistrust by the general population of their physicians. And as Katie mentions in her post, this too may lead to people looking to the internet for healthcare rather than actually going in to see a doctor. And those who lag behind via the digital divide, are often left with no insight on healthcare because they don’t even have the internet to look to for advice.
I feel this issue is an important health concern that is only going to become a more popular debate. I feel genetic discrimination is an important topic, especially when it comes to insurance companies or jobs. I recently just talked to a friend who could not be hired for a job because he was a diabetic. This is an illness he has lived with his whole life, why should it effect his career. Employers should not be able to obtain this information, or for any matter use it against you. I think the idea discussed in the video concerning genetic testing, is a great idea, but how private is it really. Like the video explains, the tests are one factor, that doesn’t mean you are definitely going to develop the disease, so insurance companies should not be able to take that information and use it against you in anyway. As a person who needs to get testing done before pregnancy, since cystic fibrous runs in my family, this issue is very scary to me. I don’t want myself or my children to be treated differently by any group, be it an employer or insurance company, because a test showed we could be a carrier for a life changing disease.
I agree with Chris that with the new healthcare reform it is hard to decide how doctors are going to be held accountable. The issue of short appointment times is one of the reasons why patients may be receiving faulty information when rushing through risks/etc with their doctors. When not all of their answers are clarified during the appointment most people will turn to the internet, and sadly there is no guarantee that the information they receive there will be correct.
I would also like to mention another possible problem with genetic testing. I think it’s nice to believe that all doctors are out there trying to do the right thing, especially since they take the Hippocratic Oath. The reality of the situation is there are still a number of doctors who will sway patients to take certain tests/drugs solely for profit. It’s similar to the problem we have with the pharmaceutical companies swaying our physicians. How do we know genetic testing services won’t do the same? It may be a stretch – but it’s something to think about.
Referencing Katie’s post and the digital divide: with that being an issue, then there is going to be even more issues with the way that doctors are disclosing information to their patients. There should not be an issue with not getting the right information, especially from a doctor. The sad thing is that there is a problem, which we have talked about in class. How much more are doctors going to be held accountable during a new health reform?
It’s sad that we live in a country where a disease someone is born with and can’t control may not be covered, but a disease one brings upon their self (ie. lung cancer/smoking) is. Genetic testing is a very new phenomenon and I personally wouldn’t mess with it. As of now I am sure that any genetic testing done would be classified as knowledge of a preexisting condition. The new healthcare bill claims, that in 2014 insurance companies may no longer deny coverage to anyone with a preexisting condition. Will genetic testing results be covered under this? Rondell’s previous comment confirms my thoughts that the laws regarding genetic testing are “gray”. Before 2014 I think it needs to be a priority of the U.S. government to pass legislation pertaining to this subject. Curiosity toward genetic testing is only going to increase, therefore our knowledge on our rights concerning genetic testing need to also be improved.
I also believe the digital divide we experience (referenced in May 19th, 2010 post) makes this situation even more difficult. Those without access to high speed internet may not look up what issues can result if one goes forth with genetic testing. In addition misleading information on the web can sway readers into taking genetic testing or not which may or may not be beneficial for them. It is a tough situation and a sad one at that.
I felt that the ethical concern that was most alarming dealt with the privacy of the individuals that shared their DNA. This relates to social justice because it deals with the issue over what constitutes property when it comes down to genetic information. This article relates to procedural justice because there is currently a “gray” area with laws regarding genetic info as there is little to no legislation pertaining the subject. When I read Chris’ post I immediately thought about how malicious health insurance companies are when it comes to determining who gets what using discrimination. And now with this new “genetic discrimination”, it allows for yet another outlet for these insurance companies to use to decides who lives and who doesn’t.
The thought that people may not be selected for a job, or not able to take a job for lack of health coverage of a certain inherited disease is something that i did not think was possible, but after reading and watching the video, seems likely. Medical care is extremely expensive in our nation and in extreme cases people may even need to relocate to find coverage for their illness.