GINA protects individuals' genetic privacy by prohibiting health insurers and employers from discriminating based on genetic information. It benefits genetic research by encouraging more individuals to participate in studies connecting genetic mutations to health conditions. Prior to GINA, many were unwilling to participate due to fears of discrimination. Now with GINA's protections, genetic researchers have more data to make breakthroughs in treatment. However, some argue GINA increases business costs for health insurers and employers by preventing consideration of genetic risk factors when determining insurance premiums or hiring.

1. GINA and Genetic Research “Genetic information” according to Section 201, Title II of GINA, is information about: a.) a person’s genetic tests b.) the genetic tests of that person’s family c.) the manifestation of a disease or disorder in that person’s family members It also includes genetic services and participation in genetic research by a person or members of their family. GINA does not only benefit individuals. It benefits geneticists as well. Due to the success of the Human Genome Project, scientists are now able to connect genetic mutations to what health problems they may cause. Studies like this typically require a lot of people. In the time between the HGP was completed and the time GINA was passed, many people were unwilling to take these tests. They were afraid that if their employer or health insurer found out about their results and the problems that could occur, they would be fired or denied proper health coverage. Now that GINA has been passed, these people no longer need to worry about their genetic information being used against them. Also, the scientists are now able to take this information and use it to make breakthroughs in the field of genetics, specifically better treatments and better drugs.

2. Arguments Against Genetic Privacy Should Health Insurers and Employers Be Able to Use Genetic Information? There are very few cons of genetic privacy. GINA passed in both houses of Congress, with a vote in the House of Representatives of 414 to 1. The Senate passed it unanimously. In 2007, a poll was conducted by the Genetics and Public Policy Center. A staggering 93% of Americans said that health insurers and employers should not be able to use genetic information (chart shown at right). On the following few slides are some possible arguments against genetic privacy. 7% 93% The data used in this chart is from the Genetics and Public Policy Center, 2007.

3. Health Insurers Against GINA GINA makes it more expensive for health insurance companies to do business. GINA does not allow health insurance companies to take a person’s genetic information into account when charging a premium if a genetic disease isn’t already manifested. For people who are at risk of developing a genetic disease but don’t already have one, an insurance company would want to charge them the highest premium possible, to ensure that the company would be able to cover the cost of any treatment they may require. However, insurers aren’t allowed to do this under GINA. This means that a person with a gene that could cause them to develop a certain type of cancer would be charged the same for health insurance as a person without that type of gene. Insurers do not like that because they consider the risk to be uneven. GINA is a problem for insurers because they are not able to figure out the probability of clients getting ill as well as they would like to because they cannot use the genetic information. This means they would have to make their insurance more expensive to make sure they had enough to cover everybody’s health insurance in general.

4. Employers Against GINA: 1 Not only does GINA make it more expensive for health insurance companies to do business, it has the same effect on other types of employers as well. Many jobs include health insurance as a benefit. This means that the company will pay for their employees’ health insurance. If an employer hired a person who ended up with a serious genetic disease, the company would end up paying for that person’s treatment. Also, the person in question would probably be absent from work because they are undergoing treatment for their disease. That means that the boss needs to find somebody to fill in for their missing employee. Then they would probably have to hire someone else. This would cost the company even more money. If GINA didn’t exist, companies would be allowed to look into everybody’s genetic information. If they had known that the person in question had a gene that could cause them to develop a genetic disorder, then the company probably wouldn’t have hired that person in the first place. From an employer’s point of view, it is cheaper to not hire someone who is at risk for sickness in the first place.