Slashdot Mirror
Pink Slip In Your Genes
An AC pointed us to this story about genetic tests: An article in Scientific American discusses the growing evidence that employers hire and fire based on genetic tests. It highlights the story of a woman whose life was probably saved by a simple genetic test. Unfortunately, the same test also cost her her job and health insurance.
No universal heathcare, it's your own fault America. The fact that you can be 'denied' heathcare in an otherwise fully first world country is insane..
It's not just Europe that is like that - most companies in Canada (barring ones that are puppets for US based companies) do not require drug testing. This is for the most part because you can't be fired in Canada (and Europe, IIRC) for drug abuse, as that would be discriminatory - your employer in most cases would even offer rehabilitation!. If you're not paying me, what I do at home, or what I did 5 years before coming to work for you is none of your business. I show up coked/stoned/drunk, that's a different matter. One of the things that irks me is that you can tell if someone's out of it without making them piss in a bottle.
If you don't want to see "blood test" added to the list of employment pre-screens, refuse them! I have only had to do this once, and got the job regardless. Tell them you object to the violation of your privacy - and you'd be suprised that most of the time you get agreed with. I'm shocked they would ask - I mean, what would they do if you asked THEM to piss in a bottle for you so you can see what kind of workplace they run?
Another thing that is distrubing is that these tests produce paperwork, and you have no control over the paperwork - it gets sent to the employer. So, you think that your credit cards are worth worrying about? Would you be worried about your medical/drug history, likely stored unsecured? Plan on running for office in 20 years? (I won't even let employers keep my school transcripts on file - you want to look, fine, but you're not getting a copy!). I get ill thinking about people that use those supermarket buying cards - I'm sure my health insurer would love to cancel my insurance in 50 years because I drank a 24 of beer every week or ate 3 pounds of bacon every weekend (etc).
You have a choice. "Just Say No". If you lose the job, fine, there are other jobs out there. If you don't say no, then don't bitch and moan when you're a second class citizen as a result. The jobs that actually have some merit to requiring drug testing are few, and the ones requiring DNA testing are IMHO non-existant.
..don't panic
Over the past year, I've had several more tests done by several different doctors that confirm the bad heart valve. One Army doctor thinks I have Marfan's Syndrome, but I think that's a mis-diagnose due to the lack of evidence and I only have the heart problem. None of the other problems. Anyways, back to the Pink Slip part.
My doctor used this information to deem me "Not Worldwide Qualified" category, which basically means I got fired. Of this, a medical board conviened and confirmed his decision. I challenged their decision on a basis of lack of evidence. They had the results from 2 Echocardiograms and 1 MUGA Scan. They decided that I should be discharged with a severance pay and a disability rating. I did not want to leave the military. So I challenged their decision and flew to Texas to a formal Medical Evaluation Board. After a whole bunch of political and monetary bullshit, I got to see a cardiologist, finally. And talk with an Air Force lawyer. The cardiologist did a few more tests and basically just confirmed that I had a bad Aortic Heart Valve. He does not think that I have Marfan's Syndrome. And my lawyer was of little help. He just wanted to not do any paperwork, I think. He did tell me that if I did challenge the board, I would lose. I would lose because the team of medical experts that sat on the formal MEB would somehow prove that this was a pre-existing, read genetic condition. And if they did, I'd lose everything. The severance pay, disability rating, and my job. So I decided not to pursue it any farther and risk losing everything, so I took their original offer and got out.
They still haven't proved anything other than I have a heart problem. So now, I have a heart problem that could or could not be related to my AF duties, but I have something that I can go to the VA with.
Soooo....to make a long story short, I was fired because of a possibly genetic condition. A Lose, Win situation if you ask me. Sure, I lost my job, but I'm getting out of this freezing place that's in the middle of nowhere and heading back to the states. I start school again next month and will have some experiance 'under my belt.' At least now I can have some chance of getting out of such a deeply entrenched WinNT network that barely has funding and go to something that at least has money flowing into its IT department. And get that piece of paper that says, "[Insert name here] you have shelled out several [ten's of] thousand dollars to us so that we can certify that you are smart enough to become part of the vast corporate ladder."
Amigori
--------------
The Air Force. A good experience if you can deal with politics and stupid people, you can work here.
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
I don't see any problem with that. Employers should be able to hire/fire based on dress code. I mean, come on, I think it's perfectly justified to fire someone for dirty jeans....
Oh.. wait.. you meant genes. My bad.
Information is the catalyst for revolution
So what you are saying is you would rather have someones potential life determined at birth rather than allow people to live their lives and make themselves what they want to be? Genes, for the most part, do not hardcode when it comes to disease and other forms of mental dispositions (ie: depression, homosexuality, excessive happiness, etc) - They simply indicate a predisposition.
By hiring/firing based on these genetic predispositions, you are entirely negating the impact that the individual person has upon their own destiny. Under your logic, it would be argumentably sound to say "Al The Geek had 1 girlfriend in highschool. Thus, he has an X% (for the sake of example, lets say 90%) of never getting married due to social ineptitude. Therefore, we must prevent Al from ever being able to marry".
The only difference is, in this case, "Al" has a genetic predisposition to Alzheimers, and thus shouldn't be allowed to work in any important task which may allow for social advancement or betterment because of the risk that he may develop the symptoms and at some point "forget" a crucial instruction. Or that Grace, who has a genetic predisposition to the possibility of poor eyesight in her middle ages cannot be allowed to be a pilot, even though no symptoms are exhibited of poor eyesight.
Genetic discrimination is something that those eschewing social darwinism have been waiting for - but instead of keeping the poor in menial jobs and the social elite making the money, instead they keep the "weak" in the menial jobs and establish positions to allow the genetic superior to become the social superior.
As much as I, in my geekness, would love to see the day come where intelligence is more respected then how many parties I throw during high school/how many cheerleaders I get in the sack, I would shudder at the idea where I am, from birth, bred for a position of social superiority due to some genetic indicator which indicates I "may be" a better learner than others.
As far as society goes, do you think a society which shuns/respects people based solely on labels (ie: studies have shown that, when given a diverse and statistically equal group, where certain students are described as teachers to be "slow learners" - when there is no basis for that - that the students then become slow learners based upon the treatment by the teachers on the assumption that they are slow learners) can handle the knowledge of whether someone "may or may not" develop a disease in the future?
In summary, I simply say "Fah!" to you and your elitist ideals.
Information is the catalyst for revolution
For those of you wondering what current laws cover here's a clarification:
Firstly, there is no specific federal law that says discrimination on the basis of your genetic information is illegal. Some judges have interpreted the ADA as doing so however, and also some people say the EEOC theoretically covers the issue. Of course, with the cases mentioned it's hard to say whether or not that actually works. There is another problem however. The ADA talks mostly about disabilties and to some extent refers to asymptomatic conditons (those not triggered yet for whatever reason) but the extent of asymptomatic coverage is also debated. For example, a woman was given health coverage but since she carried a gene for cystic fibrosis, her unborn baby was already denied insurance because it was most likely that it would develop such diseases.
Secondly, there ARE state laws protecting the rights to privacy- they just don't cover everything or everybody. Remember, since there is no uniform policy there is no uniform coverage in between any states. It is hard to generalize what protection is given, and in some cases the legislation only covers discrimination on insurance policies, by far not enough to include employment. Most advocates for a federal policy cite that these laws are too confusing, vague, and sometimes limited to actually help out the people in the cases mentioned.
That doesn't mean there hasn't been attempts to pass legislation in the past. The GPNA (Genetic Privacy and Non-Discrimination Act) of 1997 failed to pass through Congress, mostly in part because people saw the ADA as a good protection and that genetic privacy issues would thus never be a problem. If only Congress had the benefit of hindsight then. The GPNA would prevent disclosure of genetic data of a person to anybody without the written consent of that person (with a few lawful exceptions of course, such as body IDing and for criminal investigations). Generally speaking, if we get a comprehensive policy covering all Americans equally and specifically addressing the issues presented by genetic discrimination, most and hopefully all of the cases will never come up again.
--------
To smash the little atom, all mankind was intent. Now any day the atom may return the compliment.