Ethics of Genetic Testing in the Workplace
The case I will attempt to examine is Genetic Testing at Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. This case involves a worker who was required to submit to genetic testing after receiving surgery on his wrists for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. The worker (Gary Avery) was told to report for a mandatory physical after returning to work in which blood would be drawn. Gary Avery’s wife was registered nurse and she inquired about the need for the examination to include drawing blood, she found out the blood was for genetic testing. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad told Gary Avery that if he did not submit to the blood testing that he would be fired. It was discovered that the company had been secretly testing workers with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome for a DNA defect known as Chromosome 17 deletion. It was thought this genetic defect was associated with the condition of Heredity Neuropathy Pressure Palsies. It thought that this condition made people genetically predisposed to pressure related nerve injuries such as Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Ironically, the link between Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Chromosome 17 deletion had not been scientifically established, and would not have been admissible in court.
It was unlikely that Gary Avery could have been affected by the condition of Heredity Neuropathy Pressure Palsies because it only occurs in 1 out of 2500 adults. Additionally, the numerous other workers affected by Carpal Tunnel Syndrome were those who had spent many years doing heavy bone-jarring labor. Gary Avery’s union filed suit on behalf of 36 employees who had submitted to the testing procedures of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, who incidentally had filed disability claims for job related Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. The lawsuit was based on the Americans with Disabilities Act which states that “Medical examinations of existing employees must be job-related ands consistent with business necessity”, which the company claimed was the case. The company said this was because injuries to railroad workers were also subject to a 1908 law under the Federal Employers Liability Act which allows jury trials. According to the legal counsel for Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, the company has the right to defend itself when workers claim an injury is their fault. The union claims the real purpose for the genetic testing was to provide the company with a means to escape liability. The union further claimed the company attempted to use the testing to manipulate workers who were uneducated to believe that their injuries were related to genetics and not their job.
The Essay on Lifetime Employment Workers Firms Company
To manage the flow of human resources within organizations, some large and prestigious Japanese firms have adopted the policy of "lifetime employment" (Fisher et al, 1990). There have never been any official rules concerning implementation of lifetime employment, but there has been a convention of long-term employment among the large corporations. It is based on the concept that if an employee ...
The end result of the lawsuit was for the plaintiffs, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad was ordered to pay the 36 workers who filed suit 2.2 million dollars. They were also ordered to halt genetic tests on employees who had filed disability claims for work-related injuries that lead to their acquiring Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, and halt all other genetic testing. The ruling against Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad was based on the premise that it discriminated against workers, and argued that employment decisions based on the results of genetic tests violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. This case was settled in April of 2002, and since then 22 states have enacted laws banning use of genetic testing for making employment-related decisions. As technology continues to advance the use of biological testing in the workplace is sure to provide a continuing stream of issues to be settled.
I think that my moral point of view on this case is one I’m most passionate about, and the most important argument relevant to this case. Although it was not discussed at length in our text book, it was obvious that Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad was using a genetic testing as a means to refute various types of disability claims. I think the fact that the railroad’s genetic test’s attempted to link the injuries to a condition that was so rare shed light on their thinly veiled plan to avoid pay disability claims. The company argued that workers were manifesting conditions brought on by their genetic predisposition to developing them, and that they were not related to work. Self-interest and abuse of power were the first outcomes produced through genetic testing. The temptation to use genetic testing as a “get out of jail free card” with liabilities to disability claims is too irresistible for companies facing suit. It was in Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad’s self-interest to find a genetic reason for work-related injuries and avoid paying claims of injured workers.
The Essay on Down Syndrome Prenatal Genetic Testing And Tough Decisions
Choosing whether or not to keep an unborn fetus, after genetic testing shows the child has Down syndrome, is a difficult decision for most women. Genetic testing is a sophisticated diagnostic test used today to determine the health of a fetus. While they are most often prescribed for mothers-to-be over the age of 35, who run the highest risk of having children with birth defects, younger women ...
I think genetic testing will foster an imbalance of power between the employee and employer. The use of genetic testing in the workplace has uncomfortable similarities to the Nazi’s use of eugenics to promoted or disqualified people based on racial purity. The imbalance has always existed between the worker and employer, but genetic testing swings the pendulum too far in the advantage of the employer. I do not think that drug testing establishes the precedence for which genetic testing can be given an automatic green light for use in the workplace. In the case of drug testing the welfare of everyone around the drug user is at stake, and it serves the needs of all that he/she be tested as to eliminate drugs from the workplace. I think few would argue that an employer has the right to expect its employees to show up for work unimpaired. However, genetic testing brings on a completely different set of issues. Genetic testing seeks to predict the performance, of individuals by using DNA markers to predict the effectiveness of personnel. This gives employers unprecedented discretionary and subjective decision making power over employees. It is the discretionary and subjective decisions that present fairness issues. Decisions with that much subjective latitude will not be universally interpreted, or applied making fairness standard impossible.
An analogy that gives a good example of using genetics as qualifiers in decision processes of employees and basis of other workplace decisions is sports. I think we can all think of an example of a sports figure who was considered to be too small, too slow, or who had to overcome some illness before they triumphed in the athletic arena. An athletes height, weight, speed do not always translate into victory, anymore than genetic markers guarantee success in the work place. I think the use of genetic testing by employers will produce discriminatory practices in the workplace, and be used to threaten and coerce workers unfairly. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad claimed to be using genetic testing as a shield to protect itself from paying claims of injured workers those claims were in fact based on their genetic predisposition, and not job related. I think the actions of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tell a different story, and that is that genetic testing will be used as a sword, rather than a shield.
The Research paper on Genetic Testing at the Workplace
There are several moral, ethical, legal, social and cultural issues with genetic screening at the workplace. The employers would like to subject their employees to genetic testing as they would like to know the genetic weaknesses and problems that an individual may have an according employ the individual or dismiss him (in case the employee is already employed). On the other hand, the employee has ...
The economic impact of genetic testing on will be favorable for businesses, but I think overall will have a negative impact on the nation’s economy. From a business standpoint genetic testing will benefit companies that have a high incidence of disability claims filed because it will be a means that will allow them to escape compensating injured workers. Legal professionals stand to improve there financial position from all of the new legal issues that will arise from genetic testing. Companies will no doubt be busy having their corporate attorneys find every avenue to make genetic testing work for them, while personal injury lawyers do the same. The legal system will become even more strained as the litigious environment continues to grow and further drain taxpayers. When big business wins disputing disability claims of affected workers, the general public, those of us paying taxes will lose. Disabled people will then be relegated to the public dole, which provides their only safety net. Tax payers will incur additional expenses supporting people who can no longer work. Additionally if workers are ever indentified as having an unacceptable genetic marker in their DNA they could be permanently branded, and become unemployable. Those individuals who might be marked as unemployable would also become taxpayer burdens as they will no doubt become wards of the state.
The Research paper on Ethics At The Beginning Of Life: Prenatal Genetic Testing
Prenatal testing and genetic testing developed hand in hand. Many genes, the basic unit of heredity, are now known through the human genome project (Pence, 2011, pp. 273-274). Genetic testing can identify the existence of genes that carry potentially life impacting and threatening conditions. However, prenatal genetic testing can determine much more than simply the abnormalities or negative ...
The Legal implications of genetic testing in the workplace are expansive, and will be a ubiquitous source of legal wrangling well into the future. Because big business very 1st uses of genetic testing have been unscrupulous, and at the expense of employees, it should make future use unthinkable. However, it is unlikely that employers will give up easily on a tool that provides them with such control. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad clearly planned to use genetic testing for its personal gain, and unfairly manipulate the legal system with arbitrary findings. Finding health related issues to use against employees in court, gives employers all the motivation needed to continue the use of genetic testing in the workplace.
Laws always follow behind technology, and are usually created after abuse or wrong doing has occurred from the new technology. Until about 10 years ago, nobody had heard of crimes like hacking, cyber stalking, spamming and other things resulting from the computer and internet explosion. One thing that is certain regarding genetic testing is that the legal problems that have arisen so far are just a small sample of what will be coming in the future. We all have at least 1 recurring health issue within our families, be it arthritis, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, alcoholism, mental illness, obesity. Employee’s privacy will be greatly compromised and things such as incontinence or sexual disorders could become common knowledge within the work place. There is virtually an unlimited number of genetic related conditions that could be both fairly, but most likely unfairly to employees. Hopefully as cases like that of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad find there way into the court room the rulings and damage awards will be of such magnitude that further use becomes impractical.
The utilitarian argument in this case and has proven that genetic testing in the workplace does not give utility to the greatest number of people. The only benefit from genetic testing was to Northern Santa Fe Railroad, and at the expense of the 36 workers trying to be rightfully compensated for work related injuries. If genetic testing is allowed to continue the only potential gain I can see is for that of big business and their attorneys. The rest of society as a whole will lose economically in the form of having to support the disabled with their taxes. I think the loss of privacy and self determination to the individual represents the larger issue and will negatively impact the quality of life that we enjoy here in America. The utilitarian argument that best speaks against genetic testing in the workplace is the negative impact on the individual’s ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. The negative potential for DNA testing in the work place far outweighs the it potential for benefit.
The Term Paper on Genetic Testing 2
To test or not to test. That is the question. Well, Shakespeare’s Hamlet never had to answer the complex questions regarding genetic testing. But in our modern society we do have to answer these complex questions. Since the development of the Human Genome Project and genetic testing, we have had to answer the difficult question of whether or not genetic testing is the right thing to do. First we ...
The deontological issues that arise from genetic testing are also presented in the case of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and their thinly veiled plan to avoid pay disability claims. The consequences that the resulted were that genetic testing and DNA markers that were scientifically unproven were used by the employer to refute disability claims. I think the fact that the railroad’s genetic test’s attempted to link the injuries to such a rare condition illustrates the true intentions of its use. The fact that test results were also used to intimidate the workers results into dropping disability claims sheds further light on the situation. The affected workers at Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad were largely uneducated and incapable of assessing the test results. These workers were made to believe that their injuries had occurred through their own fault, or were the manifestation of some genetic anomaly which made them susceptible to injury. By attempting to link worker injuries to such a rare condition the company exposed itself and its thinly veiled plan to avoid pay disability claims.
Other consequences that are presented from genetic testing in the workplace are the privacy of workers medical records and their confidentiality of genetic data. Medical histories of employees will become known to people within the organizations and the social perceptions of certain diseases, conditions and illnesses carry stigmatization. It does not matter whether these conditions are genetic or not, they will place workers in the position of being harassed and discriminated against in the work place. Another consequence might be that workers are identified as the unlucky carrier of genetic flaws that make them unsuitable for employment. Genetic makers associated with negative health conditions, or predictors of poor performance might cause a person to be perpetually locked out of the job market.
The Term Paper on Genetic Testing 3
Genetic Testing for Diseases There is more than enough ethical mud in genetics of 1998 to keep physicians, lawyers, scientists and bioethicists on guard. A majority is unaware of the progress made in routine and exotic genetics, and most are caught off guard by each new technology. At the same time, in the United States most scientists receive no more than a few hours training in ethics, most ...
Aristotle’s virtue ethics seems to be a bad idea for consideration in this case. Having genetic makers evaluated by hiring officials, or be compared against a list of statistical criteria is too subjective to be an option. Genetic testing like a medical science will present a wide array of opinions among the experts that will not allow a single standard for use. As with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad asserting that Chromosome 17 deletion was a marker leading to genetic predisposition for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. If you take a single illness within our society like cancer and ask a panel of medical experts what is the cause, treatment, or prognosis of the disease you will get various answers. It will not be possible to train a single decision maker to decide cases involving genetic testing and get across the board consistent rulings. I think because of this fairness and a universal application of the rules is impossible.
Kant’s argument for universal application of rules and universal knowledge of all people has clearly been violated by of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad in this case. If not for Gary Avery’s wife being a registered nurse and her inquires about the company drawing blood the genetic testing would have remained secret. The employee was told that he would be fired if he did not submit to testing, which in reality was scientifically without merit. The fact that this testing was being done in secret demonstrates the impropriety of the actions and motives of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad in this case. It has been argued that pre-employment genetic testing of workers could keep employees from entering jobs which they are genetically predisposed to cause health problems. However, once the company has your blood they have it, and can test for whatever they want without your knowledge. There are an unlimited number of genetic related conditions that could be both fairly, but most likely unfairly to employees. Even if there was a universal standard of DNA markers that related to certain jobs, there would still be room for the subjective/arbitrary opinions of employers regarding their applicability. Power abuse will in the workplace will result and be a tool to penalize and coerce workers into conforming to the every whim of an employer. There is no doubt that eventually personal and non-work related favors will be requested. If a manger has the power a job description of a subordinate could suddenly require a task that disqualifies the person based on their DNA.
To summarize my argument regarding use of genetic testing in the workplace I feel that it is too complex and too easily abused to have value in the business world. Use of genetic testing will allow it to easily morph into a comprehensive management tool where power is abused. This will produce a subjective and discriminatory environment where unfair labor practices will become the rule rather than the exception. All 5 ethical schools of thought on which this issue can be argued present far more negative out come than positive. I think it returns the workplace to the same authoritarian rule which companies enjoyed at the turn of the century. People like Carnegie, Ford became rich beyond belief while controlling every aspect of employee’s lives, including their personal lives. Genetic testing will provide the ultimate control tool that insures fat cats with record profits, while perverting the very freedom and essence of the American way of life.
