Anti-Genetic Discrimination Bill Passed, but What About Our Soldiers?
The news is filled with reports that Congress sent President Bush a bill Thursday forbidding employers and insurance companies from using genetic tests showing people are at risk of developing cancer, heart disease or other ailments to reject their job applications, promotions or health care coverage, or in setting premiums.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, which has struggled with Congressional approval for a dozen years, is called by lawmakers and advocates "the first major civil rights act of the 21st century." Federal law already bans discrimination by race and gender. The Act would prohibit health insurance companies from using genetic information to set premiums or determine enrollment eligibility, and employers could not use genetic information in hiring, firing or promotion decisions.
While this may be the first such legislation passed that applies broadly to private-sector and civilian populations, some protections affecting distinct populations of Americans have been in place for more than a decade. In 1996, Congress banned genetic discrimination in group health plans, and former President Clinton signed an executive order in 2000 forbidding the practice against the government's 2 million civilian employees.
However, at the same time as such anti-discrimination efforts are being loudly touted by our nation's elected officials, the precedent for such discrimination may rest in a U.S. Armed Forces policy.
Last fall, a Los Angeles Times article surfaced this policy that specifically denies disability benefits to servicemen and servicewomen with congenital or hereditary conditions. The Times cites a case of a seven-year U.S. Army veteran who began suffering from a hereditary condition while on tour inAfghanistan
Locally, efforts to raise funds continue for the medical care of a Chicago native and career serviceman, Lt. Col. Robert Popowski (US Army, retired) who was diagnosed last year with Huntington's Disease, a genetic neurological disorder.
There's little question that increased genetic testing makes it more likely researchers will come up with early, lifesaving therapy for a wide range of diseases with hereditary links such as breast and prostate cancer, diabetes, heart disease and Parkinson's disease, and that genetic testing also will help doctors catch problems early, perhaps leading to preventive treatment and lower medical costs.
The Act is designed to address the concern held by many individuals that career opportunities and insurance coverage could be denied based on the results of genetic testing, which could keep them from obtaining potentially life-saving treatment. But will the U.S. Armed Forces policy denying benefits to those who serve our country be rescinded if the Act is signed by President Bush?
Lt. Col. Robert Popowski with his wife Jodi, a few
months before his diagnosis of Huntington's Disease.
About our Guest Author: Starr McCaffery is a communications consultant and healthcare writer in Aurora, Ill. She has written on the issues of personalized medicine and genetic testing for AAOS Now, a publication of the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and is a regular contributor to The Law Blog.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, which has struggled with Congressional approval for a dozen years, is called by lawmakers and advocates "the first major civil rights act of the 21st century." Federal law already bans discrimination by race and gender. The Act would prohibit health insurance companies from using genetic information to set premiums or determine enrollment eligibility, and employers could not use genetic information in hiring, firing or promotion decisions.
While this may be the first such legislation passed that applies broadly to private-sector and civilian populations, some protections affecting distinct populations of Americans have been in place for more than a decade. In 1996, Congress banned genetic discrimination in group health plans, and former President Clinton signed an executive order in 2000 forbidding the practice against the government's 2 million civilian employees.
However, at the same time as such anti-discrimination efforts are being loudly touted by our nation's elected officials, the precedent for such discrimination may rest in a U.S. Armed Forces policy.
Last fall, a Los Angeles Times article surfaced this policy that specifically denies disability benefits to servicemen and servicewomen with congenital or hereditary conditions. The Times cites a case of a seven-year U.S. Army veteran who began suffering from a hereditary condition while on tour in
Locally, efforts to raise funds continue for the medical care of a Chicago native and career serviceman, Lt. Col. Robert Popowski (US Army, retired) who was diagnosed last year with Huntington's Disease, a genetic neurological disorder.
There's little question that increased genetic testing makes it more likely researchers will come up with early, lifesaving therapy for a wide range of diseases with hereditary links such as breast and prostate cancer, diabetes, heart disease and Parkinson's disease, and that genetic testing also will help doctors catch problems early, perhaps leading to preventive treatment and lower medical costs.
The Act is designed to address the concern held by many individuals that career opportunities and insurance coverage could be denied based on the results of genetic testing, which could keep them from obtaining potentially life-saving treatment. But will the U.S. Armed Forces policy denying benefits to those who serve our country be rescinded if the Act is signed by President Bush?
Lt. Col. Robert Popowski with his wife Jodi, a few
months before his diagnosis of Huntington's Disease.
About our Guest Author: Starr McCaffery is a communications consultant and healthcare writer in Aurora, Ill. She has written on the issues of personalized medicine and genetic testing for AAOS Now, a publication of the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and is a regular contributor to The Law Blog.
Comments