StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a utilitarian comparison - Term Paper Example

Cite this document
Summary
Portrayals of scientific fact in the mainstream media are, to most scientists, for the most part inaccurate descriptions of legitimate research methods.One aspect of scientific research that the media commonly misrepresents is that related to genetic research…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER93.4% of users find it useful
Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a utilitarian comparison
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a utilitarian comparison"

? Notions of Genetic Discrimination, Genetic Determinism, and a Utilitarian Comparison Your College Notions of Genetic Discrimination, Genetic Determinism, and a Utilitarian Comparison Portrayals of scientific fact in the mainstream media are, to most scientists, for the most part inaccurate descriptions of legitimate research methods. One aspect of scientific research that the media commonly misrepresents is that related to genetic research. For instance, a study may be published associating on average a specific gene with a certain quantifiable behavior. The media, upon receiving word of this research, will change the wording of the story in order to sensationalize and sell the story as newsworthy, often relying on words like “cause”. Over time, the public has started to perceive “genes” as the causal determinants of our actions, our lives, and our decisions. This view, called “genetic determinism”, lies at the root of many fears about the specter of “genetic discrimination”, which many believe is on the horizon for developed countries where genome maps are becoming increasingly cheap. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether genetic discrimination will grow to become the problem many are forecasting. From an ethical perspective, the problem of genetic discrimination may not lie solely in the act of discriminating against an individual based on his or her genome; rather, the problem may lie in people’s fears about a genetic bias, which may cause some not to seek a diagnosis. Utilitarianism: The Ethical Foundation Utilitarianism is the ethical theory that the moral content of an act (or rule) consists solely of the degree to which it maximizes happiness (or utility) in the greatest number of people. In other words, the good toward which all of our actions ought to pursue, under the utilitarian theory, is happiness, pleasure, or preference-satisfaction. Accordingly, if by ending the life of one person we save the life of twenty persons, then that act is not only allowable but also preferred under the utilitarian theory. Utilitarianism does have intuitive appeal insofar as any living being will seek to maximize its pleasure and minimize its pain. This moral theory acknowledges this fact and places happiness as the good toward which we evaluate all actions as either moral or immoral. The Utilitarian Argument against Discrimination Under a utilitarian framework, the argument against discrimination in any context follows from the assumption that society will be better off, or enriched, by the contributions of as many people as possible. Thus, if people were to be discriminated against in some fashion, their contributions to society (and ideas on how to make society better) would be lost without an audience. Therefore, as the argument goes, it is wrong to discriminate against people without looking at their character or actions. Utilitarians believe that policies like affirmative action, which are aimed at producing an equal society, are good in that they produce the most happiness for the highest number of people, primarily for the reason given above. However, if this equality lowered the overall good of society, utilitarians would immediately change their mind with respect to the equality-building measures. Likewise, in the case of genetic discrimination, utilitarians usually adopt legislation and other measures to counter the effects of discriminatory practices; nevertheless, if it were to be proven that equality-building attempts (such as banning mandatory genetic testing for new employees) hurt society, utilitarians would be obligated to change their opinions with respect to that situation. The Nature of Genetic Discrimination Genetic discrimination relates to making decisions because of genetic information when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits, or any other term or condition of employment (EEOC, 2010). Employers cannot utilize genetic information to make an employment decision because genetic information does not tell the employer anything about someone’s current ability to work. Likewise, genetic discrimination may be employed by insurance providers that refuse to insure a person based on information gained from a genetic test, which may indicate a proclivity to genetically linked disorders. The Fallacy of Genetic Determinism As discussed previously, the common view of “genes” as propagated by the mainstream media suggests that our genetic code takes on a causal role in individual behaviors and actions. Scientists familiar with genetic research know this is not the case, which means that businesses and insurers that consult with experts on the meaning of genetic sequencing also know this. Genetic determinism is unmistakably false. Nevertheless, when a gene linked to cancer in one’s later life is found within an individual’s cells, it is treated as if a death sentence and an insurance liability. As Miller (2007) writes, “Most genetic markers cannot predict that an individual will get sick, only that there is a greater likelihood that he or she will actually fall ill” (p. 48). For this reason, the results of genetic testing of individual persons are likely to be misrepresented and misunderstood by those who have control of the information. Genetic Discrimination in the Workplace Genetic discrimination in the workplace may manifest itself in any number of ways, including firing, demoting, harassing, or otherwise “retaliating” against an applicant or employee for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in a discrimination proceeding (such as an investigation or lawsuit), or otherwise opposing discrimination (EEOC, 2010). These acts are all illegal under penalty of federal law under Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). In addition, the law forbids discrimination based on genetic information when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits, or any other term or condition of employment. The intent of this legislation is to avoid discriminatory practices like those seen levied against members of protected classes like race, sex, and disability in the past. Additionally, by banning genetic discrimination in the workplace, the workplace is open to those who may be excluded based on the public’s misinterpretation of genetic tests. Genetic Discrimination in Insurance For the purposes of insurance, genetic tests may provide an insurance provider the advantage of adjusting prices for their services based on the projected likelihood of that insurance recipient developing the potential disorders identified in their genomes. This would allow insurance companies to make better business decisions on who they extend services to, but recent bans on insurance companies from collecting genetic information from their customers make the process of denying coverage based simply on genetics an illegal practice. However, the idea of insurance is to protect against the unexpected or unlikely. Forbidding insurers to take predictable risks into account when choosing whom to insure and how much to charge is asking them to behave irrationally and make bets they are sure to lose. Not insuring people who are likely to get cancer, or charging them more, is not evil. I it is fundamentally rational (Kinsley, 2008). The Illegality of Genetic Discrimination Miller (2007) analyzes the Civil Rights Model for accounting for the illegality of genetic discrimination. He cites the Americans with Disabilities Act, which covers Americans against discrimination based on a manifested disability. However, in the case of genetic discrimination, the act of discriminating against individuals is done based on potential disorders and diseases. To fill that void, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 was passed to ban the use of genetic tests for both insurers and employers. By making all instances of genetic discrimination illegal, politicians demonstrated a commitment to equality and a belief in the utilitarian argument against genetic discrimination. Regardless, there is reason to doubt the validity of the utilitarian argument against genetic discrimination in particular: with particular emphasis on the assumption that allowing people who would be discriminated against without that law to not be discriminated against is in the best interests of society. It may very well be the case that these individuals will, at some future time, detract from the majority’s happiness. The Rarity of Genetic Discrimination Although there is strong media coverage of cases of genetic discrimination, and there seems to be a number of anecdotal cases of discrimination, empirical evidence suggests that our exposure to such cases is overestimated. As Miller (2007) writes, “It is difficult to know precisely how prevalent is the use of genetic testing in the workplace” (p. 48). As a result, it is also difficult to know precisely how prevalent the use of genetic testing to make employment decisions is, regardless of the legislation recently passed by the federal government. Because these numbers are not available, it makes sense that cases of genetic discrimination are rare enough that the net impact of such discrimination may not necessarily be negative for society as a whole. In fact, the utilitarian problem with genetic discrimination may not be with the effect of genetic discrimination itself: it may consist of the problems that result from fear of genetic tests, born out of the culture of fear, which has sprouted up around notions of genetic discrimination. This fear produces the genetic discrimination paradox. The Genetic Discrimination Paradox Although genetic testing in the workplace and for insurance purposes is exceedingly rare, people are hesitant to seek genetic diagnoses and genetic tests that may, in the end, improve their health because of fears spread around the existence of genetic discrimination. People believe that by submitting to a genetic test, that their private information will fall into the wrong hands and be used in illegal ways to deprive them of their employment, insurance, and other services. This irrational fear is actually working to diffuse the positive effects of genetic testing for society. As a result, a situation undesirable from a utilitarian perspective is developing: although the practice itself does not cause suffering, it is the fear of the process that, left unchecked, will eventually destroy its beneficial usefulness. Legislation that bans genetic discrimination, although symbolically meaningful, may contribute to the public’s fears. As an example, individuals who suspect a genetic history of a disease or disorder in their family may be hesitant to seek genetic testing for such a disorder, like Huntington’s disease. In 2008, a family sat afraid that if they submitted to a test, and discovered the result, that the genetic information that resulted might be used in unfavorable ways. “They really didn't feel safe having the test; there were too many worries about who could get the information to use it against them — or against their children, who might or might not later prove to have the gene” (Collins, 2008). From the utilitarian perspective, this fear interferes with families’ abilities to plan for their future, produces unhappiness, and thus is an undesirable outcome. Conclusions The more desirable outcome is for a better-informed society to understand the science behind genetic testing and understand that, although genetic tests were practically useful for most employers and insurance providers for many years before the advent of genetic discrimination legislation, cases of genetic discrimination are exceedingly rare. This is because businesses and insurance corporations, in concert with scientists, understand that genetic determinism is a fallacy: just because a person has a gene linked with a disorder like cancer does not necessarily mean that person will develop and die from cancer. Genes are not the causal determinants of our behaviors and our decisions. For that reason, the public needs to understand better genetic testing and genetic technology if only to avoid the undesirable outcome of completely shunning the technology, which has tremendous potential for good if used properly. What ought to scare us all is that scenario: when fears of genetic discrimination make the use of genetic technologies obsolete, simply because no one will submit to them. Compared to the rare case of genetic discrimination, that outcome is much more daunting. Works Cited Collins, L. (2008, June 5). Specter of genetic bias makes it scary to seek diagnosis. Retrieved February 10, 2010, from Deseret News: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700231861/Specter-of-genetic-bias-makes-it-scary-to-seek-diagnosis.html EEOC. (2010, January). Genetic Information Discrimination. Retrieved February 2010, from U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/genetic.cfm Kinsley, M. (2008, May 8). Genetic Discrimination: Unfair or Natural? Retrieved February 10, 2010, from TIME: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1738513,00.html Miller, P. (2007). Genetic testing and the future of disability insurance: Thinking about discrimination in the genetic age. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 35, 47-51. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a Term Paper”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/biology/1407493-notions-of-genetic-discriminationgenetic-determinismand-a-utilitarian-comparison
(Notions of Genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a Term Paper)
https://studentshare.org/biology/1407493-notions-of-genetic-discriminationgenetic-determinismand-a-utilitarian-comparison.
“Notions of Genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a Term Paper”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/biology/1407493-notions-of-genetic-discriminationgenetic-determinismand-a-utilitarian-comparison.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a utilitarian comparison

Human Nature or Affirmative Action

This assignment "Human Nature or Affirmative Action" bases its argument on the fact that human nature is good based on the five moral principles in Chapter Four of Sterling Harwood's book, Business as Ethical and Business as Usual; the principle of perfection.... hellip; Plato argues that it is human nature that will prompt someone to drink water when he is thirsty due to the human nature that knows the answer to thirst is drinking water....
22 Pages (5500 words) Assignment

A Misuse of Good Science

Medical ethics would dictate that, "Genetic privacy, like medical privacy in general, involves notions of the dignity and integrity of the individual" (Bereano).... hellip; genetic testing has worked its way into the workplace and has replaced the background check of the past.... Advocates have praised the method as being for the safety and welfare of the employee, but at what cost genetic testing is an inaccurate invasion of privacy that has a high probability of misuse and employers should be banned from using this procedure to determine a potential employee's fitness. genetic Screening by Employers: A Misuse of Good Science There was a time when you would sweat your way through a job interview only to receive a letter a week later saying, "Sorry, but we found someone more qualified"....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

Genetic Differences Among Humans

has summarized his research of 40 years on the connections between current genetic data and the evolutionary past.... The evidence collected by him has led to the belief that modern humans originated in Africa and The Middle East and then spread out. … A genetic factor that has in recent years become a subject of raging debate in education is 'intelligence quotient' (IQ).... Since then it has been a subject of debate whether these differences have a genetic basis....
4 Pages (1000 words) Essay

Ethical Implications of a Biological Issue: Behaviour Genetics

However it has to be kept in mind that certain human behaviour tends to run in families which implies a strong genetic characteristic of behaviour.... The main reasons for which selective breeding and genetic engineering are carried out would be profitability although improving the lot of future generations could be one of the reasons for genetic engineering as only the desired attributes are emphasised.... genetic engineering could solve the ethical issues of using behavioural changes and responses by creating traits in organisms that are mainly beneficial for society although this may not be practically possible as multiple genes can lead to a particular behaviour and genes may cause multiple behavioural traits, all of which may not even be socially acceptable (Byrne, 2004, Plomin et al, 2002)....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Producing Mutant Clones

Samples of the cells and genetic material were loaded onto five different lanes and were combined with SDS-polyacrylamide gel.... In order to target the RAD51 gene, a very specific experimental procedure was followed, and it is clearly outlined in this paper.... This procedure was designed to produce RAD51 mutant clones, and this was done by causing a disruption to both of the alleles in the RAD51 gene....
4 Pages (1000 words) Essay

GENETICS UNIT 7 ASSIGNMENT (Unit 7: Genomics and Genetic Engineering)

A reflection of bloom syndrome helps in understanding its link to mutation, symptoms, discovery, and possible application of genetic engineering technology on the disease. Mutation has Genomics and Genetic Engineering Genomics and Genetic Engineering Bloom Syndrome Various advancements continue to take place around the world.... A reflection of bloom syndrome helps in understanding its link to mutation, symptoms, discovery, and possible application of genetic engineering technology on the disease....
2 Pages (500 words) Assignment

Ethics Is Used to Define the Diverse Regulations and Conducts

Business ethics is defined as the study of the proper practices and policies in businesses in regards to potentially controversial issues for instance insider trading, corporate governance, discrimination, fiduciary responsibilities, and corporate social responsibility.... The paper "Ethics Is Used to Define the Diverse Regulations and Conducts" states that the market shapes the private vices in the society into public virtues as it places society members into circumstances where they have to consistently concern themselves with the wellbeing and desires of others....
26 Pages (6500 words) Essay

Notions of Genetic Discrimination, Genetic Determinism, and a Utilitarian Comparison

From an ethical perspective, the problem of genetic discrimination may not lie solely in the act of discriminating against an individual based on his or her genome; rather, the problem may lie in people's fears about a genetic bias, which may cause some not to seek a diagnosis.... Under a utilitarian framework, the argument against discrimination in any context follows from the assumption that society will be better off, or enriched, by the contributions of as many people as possible....
6 Pages (1500 words) Term Paper
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us