Genetic discrimination legislation in Canada: moving from rhetoric to real debate

Nicholls and Fafard are to be congratulated for a fascinating and well written article on 'genetic discrimination' and its implications for life insurance. Of course, one must sympathise with an individual who is refused life insurance (or quoted an unaffordable premium) on the basis of an undesirable genetic test - or, as the authors put it, "their pure genetic bad luck." But it should be remembered that the life insurance business is already 'unfair', in the sense that it discriminates against individuals living with chronic conditions like epilepsy, cardiomyopathy, schizophrenia, atrial fibrillation, and scores of other disorders. Adding genetic information into the mix doesn't fundamentally change the way that insurers scrutinise the health histories of their customers.

Life insurance is a contract negotiated between an individual and a provider of financial services, based on full disclosure. It cannot be regarded as a human right, in the way that clean water and accessible health care might be. Life insurance, ipso facto, doesn't provide any benefit to the policyholder, because the proceeds of any payout go to somebody else.

Realistically, I suspect that the answer lies not in seeking to withhold genetic test results from insurers, but in making sure that every patient referred for genetic testing is first made aware of the possible impact on his or her insurability. In other words, think twice.

Conflict of Interest:

None declared