Voices From The Nursing School
ADNA Discrimination Is Illegal!
My nursing colleague, “S,” has a 50/50 chance of inheriting Polycystic Kidney Disease from her father. At the age of 28, through genetic testing, she will find out if she has the gene that will inevitably cause her body to develop cysts in her kidneys, liver and other organs. There is no cure, so why would she get screened? And more immediately, if she has the gene, will she be dropped by her health insurance company for having a pre-existing condition?
S’s situation is relevant to the bill the senate unanimously approved HR 493 last week; a bill entitled the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). As the title suggests anyone who has a genetic test and finds out they carry genes that may cause them to develop a disease later in life, can’t be discriminated against. Your genes are now protected against discrimination in the same way you can’t be discriminated against for your age, gender, race, religion, etc. Neither your employer nor health insurance companies can use your genetic test results against you, for example by firing you or declaring that you have a pre-existing condition and dropping your health coverage. While I find this a step in the right direction for treating long-term health outcomes and protecting patient privacy, I’m left wondering why we are allowed to discriminate against people once they develop a disease. I’m beginning to think that healthcare is a right….
… The solution for our patients, friends, family, colleagues and ourselves is already here, we have a bill, SB 840, in the state of California and HR 676 is a federal bill. As students and American residents we are all in this healthcare system together and as voters and constituents we have the power to change the system into a fair one. Everyone in, nobody out! NS4universalcare.blogspot.com
David Golden also supports HR 676, a Canadian this it is the best proposal for American healthcare.
Front page
enforcement?
i don’t see how this is enforceable at all—especially because HMOs and insurers will still legally be allowed to deny coverage for all other non-genetic pre-existing conditions and diseases. (and the overwhelming majority of pre-existing denials are for non-genetic things, simply because they haven’t pinpointed all the genetic things)
It’s needed, but a blanket law against not covering all pre-existing and chronic things is needed much much more—as long as we have private insurance that’s job-based.
it is not enforceable
that is why we need a single payer system. As long we have an employer based system employers will discriminate against older workers and insurance companies will cherry pick.
that's what i think, DC--
and while we still are stuck with this horrible stuff, we should be passing legislation outlawing all denial of coverage for all pre-existing conditions, not just genetic ones that are identified.
Slate on GINA--
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/convict…
— “… After GINA, employers can still discriminate against a person whose genes have bestowed him with a bad smell, awkward social skills, or a weak grasp of arithmetic. GINA does not ban discrimination on the basis of genetic information. GINA bans only discrimination on the basis of genetic information that has not yet manifested itself in observable characteristics or behaviors but that is likely to in the future. There is no sense in this distinction.”