Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Use of Genetic Testing Information in the Insurance Industry: An Ethical and Societal Analysis of Public Policy Options

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The commitment to equality embodied in our political tradition…is an assertion that before this government, this system of laws and courts, all persons are to be given equal standing, and all persons must be treated with equal regard. Human genetics, in contrast, is a science of inequality—a study of human particularity and differences.

Thomas H. Murray (1992, 12).

Abstract

Informed by a search of the literature about the usage of genetic testing information (GTI) by insurance companies, this paper presents a practical ethical analysis of several distinct public policy options that might be used to govern or constrain GTI usage by insurance providers. As medical research advances and the extension to the Human Genome Project (2016, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genome_Project_-_Write) moves to its fullness over the next decade, such research efforts will allow the full synthesis of human DNA to be connected to predictive health dispositions. As testing costs fall, there will be ever more pressure for citizens to disclose GTI. Genetic testing information is integral to future medical care because it can be used to better assess individually tailored medical therapies as well as to allow a more informed risk analysis by the insurance industry, which in some countries such as the USA underwrites a majority of citizen medical expenses. As discussed in this examination, the revelation of people’s uniquely personal GTI to insurers has enormous societal implications. The major contribution of the paper is to offer policy makers and concerned citizens a nuanced articulation of the basic options to regulate GTI, with a special consideration for ethical fairness and equity. As genetic-based medicine blossoms and pressures to reduce healthcare costs increase, there will be an ever greater impetus for countries to revisit their genetic testing policies. Organizations and policy makers striving to create GTI oversights perceived to be both “fair and effective” need to be aware of the ethical perspectives discussed in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Affordable Health Care for America Act. (2010). HR 3590 amended as Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. (December).

  • Almqvist, E., Bloch, M., Brinkman, R., Craufurd, D., & Hayden, M. (1999). A worldwide assessment of the frequency of suicide, suicide attempts, or psychiatric hospitalization after predictive testing for Huntington disease. American Journal of Human Genetics, 64, 1293–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apel, K.-O. (1988). Diskurs und Verantwortung: Das Problem des Übergangs zur postkonventionellen Moral. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, T., Bass, K., Brown, G., & Hebert, F. J. (1998). Ethical ideology and the ethical judgments of marketing professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(May), 715–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billings, P., Kohn, M., de Cuevas, M., Beckwith, J., Alper, J., & Natowicz, M. (1992). Discrimination as a consequence of genetic testing. American Journal of Human Genetics, 50, 476–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, T. (1999). Outrageous fortune: The risk of suicide in genetic testing for Huntington disease. American Journal of Human Genetics, 64, 1289–1292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbacher, D. (1983). Hans Jonas, das Prinzip Verantwortung. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung, 37, 144–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borna, S., & Avila, S. (1999). Genetic information: Consumers’ right to privacy versus insurance companies’ right to know. A public opinion survey. Journal of Business Ethics, 19(4), 355–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. (1999). Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. (2002). Ethical reasoning in practice: A Kantian approach to business ethics. In T. Donaldson, P. H. Werhane, & M. Cording (Eds.), Ethical issues in business: A philosophical approach (pp. 61–71). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockett, P., & Tankersley, S. (1997). The genetics revolution, economics, ethics and insurance. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(15), 1661–1676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, A., Brock, D., Daniels, N., & Winkler, D. (2000). From chance to choice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, J. (1990). From the ‘applied” to the practical: Teaching ethics for use. American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Teaching Philosophy, 90(1), 29–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardon, J., & Hendel, I. (2001). Asymmetric information in health insurance: Evidence from the National Medical Expenditure Survey. Rand Journal of Economics, 32(3), 408–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CDC (Center for Disease Control) (2017). Genomic testing. Retrieved March 18, 2017 from http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/gtesting/

  • Crocker, K., & Snow, A. (2013). The theory of risk classification. In G. Dionne (Ed.), Handbook of Insurance. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte. (2013). Health insurance market overview. Deloitte Consulting LLP. (August).

  • Dionne, G., & Rothschild, C. (2014). Economic effects of risk classification bans. The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, 39, 184–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunfee, T. W., Smith, C., & Ross, W. T. (1999). Social contracts and marketing ethics. Journal of Marketing, 63(3), 14–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durnin, M., Hoy, M., & Ruse, M. (2012). Genetic testing and insurance: The complexity of adverse selection. Ethical Perspectives, 19(1), 123–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, O.C., & Ferrell, L. (2008) A macromarketing ethics framework: stakeholder orientation and distributive justice. Journal of Macromarketing, 28(1), 24–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49(3), 87–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R. (1992). Judging the morality of business practices: The influence of personal moral philosophies. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(4), 461–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankena, W. (1963). Ethics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2002). Our posthuman future. Consequences of the biotechnology revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geller, L., Alper, J., Billings, P., Barash, C., Beckwith, J., & Natowics, M. (1996). Individual, family, and societal dimensions of genetic discrimination: A case study analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2(1), 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). (2008). Pub. L. No. 110-233.

  • Hare, Richard M. (1991). Moral thinking: Its levels, method and point. Oxford: Claredon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. (1992). Wonderwoman and superman; the ethics of human biotechnology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvard Law Review. (2009). Health law—Genetics—Congress restricts use of genetic information by insurers and employers.—Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. Harvard Law Review, 122(3), 1038–1045.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedgeco, A. (1996). Genetic catch-22: Testing, risk and private health insurance. Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 15(2), 69–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, B. (1993). The practice of moral judgment. New York: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Genome Project/Write. (2016). Wikipedia.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genome_Project_-_Write. Accessed October 28, 2016.

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (1986). General theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6(Spring), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2006). The general theory of marketing ethics: A revision and three questions. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(2), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IRMI (International Risk Management Institute). (2016). Retrieved April 30, 2016 from https://www.irmi.com/online/insurance-glossary/terms/a/adverse-selection.aspx

  • Joly, Y., Braker, M., & Huynh, M. (2010). Genetic discrimination in private insurance: Global perspectives. New Genetics and Society, 29(4), 351–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. (1979). Das Prinzip Verantwortung: Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. (1985). Technik, Medizin und Ethik: Zur Praxis des Prinzips Verantwortung. Frankfurt am Main: Insel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. (1994). Naturwissenschaft versus Natur-Verantwortung? Hans Jonas im Gespräch mit Eike Gebhardt. In D. Böhler (Ed.), Ethik für die Zukunft: Im Diskurs mit Hans Jonas (pp. 197–212). München: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1965). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (Foundations of the metaphysics of morals). (Original publication 1783). Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.

  • Laczniak, G., & Murphy, P. (1993). Ethical marketing decisions: The higher road. Toronto: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laczniak, G. R., & Murphy, P. E. (2006). Normative perspectives for ethical and socially responsible marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(2), 154–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laczniak, G., & Murphy, P. (2008). Distributive justice: Pressing questions, emerging Directions, and the Promise of Rawlsian analysis. Journal of Macromarketing, 28(1), 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landes, X. (2015). How fair is actuarial fairness? Journal of Business Ethics, 128, 519–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, E. (2006). Genetic diagnosis and testing in clinical practice. Clinical Medicine & Research, 4(2), 123–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mill, S. J. (1979). Utilitarianism. (Original publication 1863), Indianapolis: Liberal Arts Press.

  • Murphy, P. (1999). Character and virtue ethics in international marketing: An agenda for managers, researchers and educators. Journal of Business Ethics, 18(1), 107–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P., Laczniak, G., Bowie, N., & Klein, T. (2005). Ethical marketing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, T. H. (1992). Genetics and the moral mission of health insurance. Hastings Center Report, 22(6), 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, T. H. (1997). Genetic exceptionalism and “future diaries”: Is genetic information different from other medical information? In M. Rothstein (Ed.), Genetic secrets: Protecting privacy and confidentiality in the genetic era. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NIH (National Institutes of Health. (2016). Genetic testing: How it is used for healthcare. Retrieved April 17, 2016 from https://report.nih.gov/nihfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=43

  • Nill, A., Aalberts, R. J., Li, H., & Schibrowsky, J. (2015). New telecommunication technologies, big data, and online behavioral advertising: do we need an ethical analysis? In A. Nill (Ed.), Handbook on ethics and marketing. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi:10.4337/978178003435. ISBN 987-1-78100-3428.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nill, A., & Schibrowsky, J. (2007). Marketing ethics research: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Macromarketing, 27(2), 256–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oster, E., Shoulson, I., Quaid, K., & Ray Dorsey, E. (2010). Genetic adverse selection: Evidence from long-term care and Huntington’s disease. Journal of Public Economics, 94, 1041–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otlowski, M., Taylor, S., & Bombard, Y. (2012). Genetic discrimination: International perspectives. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 13, 433–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettypiece, S., & Robertson, J. (2014). Did you know you had diabetes? It’s all over the internet. Available online at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-11/how-big-data-peers-inside-your-medicine-chest.html

  • Radetzki, M., Radetzki, M., & Juth, N. (2003). Genes and insurance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. (1990). On John Rawls’ a theory of justice: Is a pure procedural theory of justice possible? International Social Science Journal, 42(4), 553–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. (2010). Preempting discrimination: Lessons from the genetic information nondiscrimination act. Vanderbilt Law Review, 63(2), 439–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochman, B. (2017). The gene machine: How genetic technologies are changing the way we have kids. Scientific American: Farrar, Straus & Giraux.

  • Rothschild, M., & Stiglitz, J. (1976). Equilibrium in competitive insurance markets: An essay on the economics of imperfect information. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 629–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. (1999a). Why treating genetic information separately is a bad idea. Texas Review of Law & Politics, 4(1), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. (1999b). Behavioral genetic determinism: Its effects on culture and law. In R. Carson & M. Rothstein (Eds.), Behavioral genetics. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. (2007). Genetic exceptionalism and legislative pragmatism. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 35, 59–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. (2008a). Currents in contemporary ethics. GINA, the ADA, and genetic discrimination in employment. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(4), 837–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. (2008b). Currents in contemporary ethics. Is GINA worth the wait? Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(1), 174–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. (2013). Epigenetic exceptionalism. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 41(3), 733–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlegelmilch, B. (1998). Marketing ethics: An international perspective. London: Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. (1986). Applied ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, L. (2017). Employees who decline genetic testing could face penalties under proposed bill.

  • Suter, S. (2001). The allure and peril of genetic exceptionalism: Do we need special genetics legislation? Washington University Law Review, 79(3), 669–749.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracer, Z., & Doherty, K. (2016). Aetna CEO says young people pick weekend beer over Obamacare. Retrieved November 5, 2016 from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-25/aetna-says-obamacare-plans-aren-t-worth-it-to-healthy-people

  • Vaughn Switzer, J. (2003). Disabled rights: American disability policy and the fight for equality. Washington: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitell, S., & Hunt, S. (2015). The general theory of marketing ethics: Consumer ethics and intentions issues. In A. Nill (Ed.), Handbook on ethics and marketing. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi:10.4337/978178003435. ISBN 987-1-78100-3428.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, F. (2007). Huntington’s disease. Lancet, 369(9557), 218–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, C. (1988). The moral manager. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. (1992). New York: Barnes and Noble.

  • Werner, M. (2003). Hans Jonas’ Prinzip Verantwortung. In M. Düwell & K. Steigleder (Eds.), Eine Einführung (pp. 41–56). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthham, L. (1986). Insurance classification: Too important to be left to actuaries. University of Michigan Law Reform, 19, 349–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zick, C., Charles Mathers, J., Roberts, S., Cook-Deegan, R., Pokorski, R., & Green, R. (2005). Genetic testing for Alzheimer’s disease and its impact on insurance purchasing. Health Affairs, 24(2), 483–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwart, H. (2015). Human genome project: History and assessment. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 11(2), 311–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing and International Business, Lee Business School, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA

    Alexander Nill

  2. Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Gene Laczniak

  3. Department of Finance, Lee Business School, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA

    Paul Thistle

Authors
  1. Alexander Nill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gene Laczniak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Thistle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Nill.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nill, A., Laczniak, G. & Thistle, P. The Use of Genetic Testing Information in the Insurance Industry: An Ethical and Societal Analysis of Public Policy Options. J Bus Ethics 156, 105–121 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3554-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3554-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation