Genomics has always been a controversial study. To research on the entire genetic make up of an organism poses a lot of heated controversies. Why so? One of the more controversial topics of genomics is genetic testing. Predictive Genetic Testing (PGT) is the process of testing an individual’s future risk of actually acquiring a disease.
PGT is employed in conditions such as carrier testing to determine whether and individual has a defective gene that could be inherited, prenatal diagnosis where the baby is screened for particular disorder and predictive testing where individuals with family history of disorder is tested for risk of developing a disorder (Krof 2000). Behavioral genetics or the study of the link between specific genes and behavior has also proven to be controversial. Geneticists claim that specific genes dictate certain behavior of individuals.
This practice causes a lot of debate. If an individual was detected to have the “criminal gene”, should that individual be automatically taken into preventive custody or under go behavior modification? If one was detected to have the “gay genes”, should it then be treated as genetic aberration that needed modification? (Enriquez 2000) Currently CDC has efforts to integrate genetic testing with public health. This means that common genetic diseases could be detected early thus interventions would be properly executed.
The CDC’s primary purpose is to assess the general health of the population thru genetic testing. However, there are a number of major issues on this (Gibson 2004). One such issue is that in prenatal testing, when genetic aberration is detected, should abortion be an open option? Another issue is that who has the right to be tested. For example, a mother was tested and found out to have a defective gene. If her child, not yet of age of consent, is deemed to have the possibility of also carrying the genes, should the child, under the duress of the mother also be tested?
Some people argue that carrier testing may negatively affect the future prospect of the child, thus testing should only be done at the age where the child could already consent to his own testing (Smith 2005). The most critical issue of genetic testing is privacy. Who has the right to access such information about an individual? The right for access is, of course, dependent on the purpose of he testing, whether the test was done for medical purposes, or perhaps to aide in personal decision-making process.
However, it is undeniable that once an individual undergoes genetic testing, his genetic information will already be mapped out thus this maybe, one way or another, available to others. He may be subjected to genetic discrimination in claiming for health benefits or insurance, or in employment prospects (Enriquez 2000). The ratification of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) gives some form of protection. The law was explicit in stating that the diagnosis from genetic testing could not be qualified as a preexisting condition.
However, there are no clause regarding mandatory genetic testing, terms of disclosure of genetic information and maximum premiums that could be set based on the diagnosis; There is also a national law that prohibits employers to discriminate individuals based on genetic information. However, this does not change that fact that employers may use other means to discriminate an individual because of his genetic information (Enriquez 2000). There are still no concrete laws on genetic testing. There are some laws that provide only limited protection to individuals.
For this reason, one should be careful in undergoing genetic testing. The purpose of the testing should be first thoroughly examined. The doctors who are to perform the testing should first exhaustively explain the impact of the testing psychologically, socially, morally etc. Furthermore, the issue of confidentiality should be made clear to the individual and how this issue might affect his future prospects. Integrating genetic testing in public health and behavior genetics are both beneficial and should be pursued hand in-hand as the practice complements each other.
However, only when issues are addressed should CDC aggressively pursue integration of genetic testing in public health or geneticist to actively practice behavior genetics of a mass scale.
References Enriquez, Juan. (2000). As the Future Catches You: How Genomics and Other Forces are Changing Your Life, Work, Health and Wealth: New York: Crown Business. Gibson, Greg & Spencer Muse. (2004). A Primer of Genome Science. 2nd Edition. US: Sinauer Associates, Inc. Krof, Bruce. (2000). Human Genetics: A Problem-Based Approach. US: Blackwell Publishing, Inc. Smith, Gina. (2005). The Genomics Age. New York: AMACOM.