Bill incentivizes workplace genetic testing

Post Reply New Topic

Does House Bill 1313 Require Employees to Submit to Genetic Testing? The bill allows offering benefits for "voluntary" workplace programs that may include "health risk assessments" but does not enable mandatory genetic testing of employees. - Snopes

This is not good for a whole lot of people. Wellness programs are an updated version of the old "Fitter Families Contests" from the eugenics era. If this bill goes through it brings the genetic element back. While legally not allowed the reality of the workplace especially in the current teamwork/open office era is in a lot of companies if you do not participate in companies "voluntary" programs you are branding yourseld a non team player and at best ending any chance of promotion and often writing your own ticket to unemployment.

For autistics while the fact that there is no one genetic test for autism may seem to protect us IRL genetic "indicators" of autism will be enough to have employers looking to get rid of you because most jobs are "at will"

In another thread we were discussing if parents are more accepting these days of differences. I cautioned watch what they do, not what they say. That very much applies to this situation and companies that brag about "diversity" .

Having been employed in the past at a company which conducted "voluntary wellness tests" to determine the amount you had to pay towards your health insurance benefit ... you were in fact penalized if you decided not to undergo the physical, because you were charged more. I chose to have the physical, and based on what they tested and how, felt that the testing was unfair because there was not enough room for individual differences.

Genetic testing would be far worse. I hope it never gets passed.

If you have ASD and have not disclosed this to your employer - then there's nothing to worry about...no genetic tests exist for ASD or ADHD etc....

^^ Well, now----last I heard, ASD and ADHD weren't the ONLY disorders; and, the article also says "disease".

As for the OP: Since there's a 50/50 chance of getting fired if I didn't participate, and a 50/50 chance of getting fired if they found some horrible disease, I would NOT do it. It's none of a company's friggin' business----AND, it's sounding a little too "big brother", for ME!!

I can support this. I think healthcare costs should be different based on your health. Overweight, smokers, drinkers, and people with sedentary lifestyles should be charged more for insurance. I think it would be cool if you could submit data from things like Fitbit for cheaper insurance.

Mandatory workplace testing (which is what this Bill is really about) only really benefits employers to reduce their risk, it's voluntary at the moment but that can change...

Last edited by cyberdad on 11 Mar 2017, 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think paying health insurance based on health can save people money and give incentive to people to engage in healthier practices.

I think the framework for the bill is around voluntary testing but I think they are laying the groundwork for future modifications when (and if) genetic testing becomes more advanced/accurate in detection of so called "deliterious" genes

You'll have to forgive me for being "Orwellian" but big companies are more interested in productivity than in workers benefits

Which is fine if you are aiming at reducing bad lifestyle choices - excessive food, drugs and lack of physical fitness in return for lowering insurance premiums

And everyone thought Big Brother was the government.

How is this big brother? This isn't surveillance. I would say government spying is way more big brother.

This is very concerning because of where it will be going. They may not be allowed by law but you would have to prove discrimination. Employers and insurance companies alike will eventually use this information to discriminate and you'll never be able to prove it. Having to pay more for insurance if you don't sign up is a penalty and people who don't make a lot of money will be forced to participate for this reason. If you are making little money can you really afford to give up a large discount on your health insurance? No way. Stuff like this is why the entire insurance system needs to be scrapped and single payer or a similar system needs to be implemented. Then you can have opt in to these programs without people having to worry about insurance companies raising your premiums for "unknown reasons" or employers getting hold of genetic information they can use to get rid of you or not hire you. Human history has shown there is no limit to the evil people are capable of given enough power and limited oversight.

But it is surveillance. But instead of spying on what you do, they insist on looking at the very core of what and who you are. What's keeping big business from using this information to justify firing employees because they may be a health risk? If the Republicans ever overturn the ban on denying insuring someone with preexisting conditions, then this would be used by every insurance companies to weed people out because they might have a health issue someday.

I agree that genes shouldn't be used for insurance. I remember reading about how genetic testing doctors used to keep some of the information secret. If I remember right they did that to avoid insurance companies from denying coverage.

My point exactly.