Genetic Discrimination in the IT Workplace 556
MisterTut writes "In what could be a troubling trend, one employer- the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway -was found to have secretly run unproven genetic tests on workers suffering Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. The company was trying to prove that they were not culpable for cases of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from which the employees were suffering.
The ethical considerations of such testing, covert and illicit or not, are profound for those of us working in the IT industry."
Life imitating art? (Score:2, Interesting)
People cheat at everything. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Genetic Testing !Consent == Invasion of Privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
Aside from possible testing for other conditions (diabetics, pregnant women, etc all miraculously testing positive on the drug screen so that the company doesn't have to pay for their problems), you can be declined for a job purely based on what you do on your off hours.
Many people would sneer and say "if you don't like it,find another job", but when a growing number of employers are doing drug screens, genetic tests, or whatever for those precious insurance discounts, you don't have much of a choice if you want to support yourself or your family.
Re:This could backfire... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And what if... (Score:2, Interesting)
Just my 2c...
I disagree with "ethical" opposition to embryonic stem cell research, because 1) I disagree that an embryo is a person and 2) because I find that those who oppose ESCR because "it's murder" are just fine with killing criminals and foreign civilians.
I would say that *without* consent, genetic testing presents a privacy problem. If the person is consenting, the only problem there would be if they were coerced (do it or yer fired).
I don't think I'm a hypocrite, but then neither do the people who oppose abortion and ESCR because "it's murder", but are pro death penalty and pro bomb brown people.
But can you prove it? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And what if... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Genetic Testing !Consent == Invasion of Privacy (Score:0, Interesting)
Except that in most states, for example, if you throw something away, they can search it since it's no longer in your possession, instead part of the public.
So if you drop a hair follicle or drink from a paper cup (which the company paid for), technically, it's not yours anymore since you gave up your right since you didn't keep control of it (in terms of the hair) or the cup is company property in their garbage on their premises....
They can test DNS from many ways - not requiring you to give them a blood/saliva sample directly.
I don't have a problem with it - if you have a genetic issue that could prevent you from doing the job you're being hired for, I don't think they should have any reason to hire you over someone who doesn't have it. It's not any different than not having to hire someone in a wheelchair to sweep and mop the steps in your building. There's resonable expectation that you have to be able to do the work.
I have a "pre-existing condition" (Score:5, Interesting)
My mobility is affected and I certainly can't dance anymore. (The cane was getting to be a hazard to the others on the dance floor. I know because I danced at a XMas party a couple or jobs ago.
Trouble is that I am probably working on the last job I will ever be able to get. I'm not that old, 50, so what am I supposed to do what that job 'goes away' as all consulting tech jobs that I ever worked on over the past 25 years have done.
I'm too handicapped and I may be too old for retraining, despite the Associate's in Business that I am currently getting (at week's end thank you.)
I am just getting tossed out. Its nothing personal but that's just the way it goes. The software I was working on (a CRM system written in Smalltalk,) has been end-of-lifed.
What am I supposed to do for money? I don't want a free ride but odds are that, if I wouldn't hire someone disabled like me, nobody else will either.
I'm not dead yet, but some days, I sort of get the feeling that everybody else wishes that I was. so they wouldn't have to be bothered.
A recipe for disaster... (Score:1, Interesting)
"...all the folks I know with 'carpal'..."
Your experience is very limited, young man. Have you been to college? If so, you should have an idea of how incredibly few people you have actually met in your short life time.
"It's sort of like the handicapped parking spots everywhere - I can't remember the last time I saw someone wheelchair-bound park in one, can you?"
They aren't just for Stephen Hawkings, dude. There are folks with heart conditions that would have a coronary from walking from the last row at Wal Mart, but just from looking at them you couldn't know they had a handicap.
You wouldn't know of my friend Mike's handicap without close scrutiny - he had polio as a child. Very painful.
In short, sir, your arrogance has blinded you. Arrogance leads to continued ignorance, because if you think you know everything, how could you possibly learn anything?
Grow up.
Re:BN-SF sucks anyway - this isn't a surprise (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Genetic Testing !Consent == Invasion of Privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
What are you going to do if a sibling gets arrested? Although there is enough difference between you and your siblings to avoid the claim that because your brother has a disorder that you should have it too, it may be provide the basis for a legal challenge should it come up in a workman's compensation claim. The employer can get to your family member's DNA without a court order because that information is part of the public record when they are arrested (in some, if not all, jurisdictions).
So an employer can simply have the courts compel you to disclose your genome without taking the draconian and ethically-challenged route of covert testing. Considering the sheer number of offenses that qualify for DNA fingerprinting upon arrest (and growing each year), it won't be long until portions of everyone's DNA will be part of an arrest record - and by extension, part of the public record.
--
"Science is completely neutral with respect to philosophical or theological implications that may be drawn from its conclusions." - Fr. George Coyne, American Jesuit priest and distinguished astronomer
Re:And what if... (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow. It's amazing people think this way, not surprising, but amazing. "Power corrupts, corporations have power over employees, therefore they are evil". However, government, with even more "power" than any corporation could hope for, is good. They protect us. And in cases where they are corrupt, it's because "...[corporations] have been able to corrupt the government".
I'm not sure why I ever wonder how our current political environment has remained for so long. Thanks for the reminder.
Union = Useless In this Case - Yes! (Score:2, Interesting)
obesity and people with CP (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And what if... (Score:2, Interesting)
The problem I see with the whole debate on stem cell research, abortion, etc. is that the discussion is based on generalities and painting broad strokes with huge brushes.
Quite frankly, if I as an individual do not want any embryos that I have sired to be used for stem cell research, there isn't a SINGLE researcher out there that would even, for a moment, consider trying to force ME (just ME) to acquiesce.
At every step of the process in obtaining viable stem cell lines for research (or commercial applications, when the research bears fruit), every possible step is taken to ensure that the ultimate "owners" of the genetic information agree to the use of that information for these purposes. At least, this is my understanding.
So, for all those folks who have a problem with it, just say no, personally, individually. Let everyone else do the same. Regardless of how a "person" is defined, let's not try to apply this broadly, generically.
In a case-by-case, individual scenario, you could easily imagine a couple at a fertility clinic talking with a doctor who has tested certain ova or even embryos and found that they are, individually, unable to sustain life. At that point, the doctor presents a form and asks quite simply: "These cells cannot provide you a child, would you agree to their use to further research derived from these cells?" Some folks may still have a moral or otherwise personal problem with that and say No. Others may not and say Yes.
Either way, this is a personal, individual decision that needs to be carried out on a case-by-case basis. Generalizing it and lifting it to a higher level really obfuscates the issue and complicates matters unnecessarily, as it introduces parties into the equation that really have no reason to be involved.
Sorry, had to throw in my $0.02.
Re:And what if... (Score:2, Interesting)
unless your basis for opposing abortion is that "god said thou shalt not kill".
It's perfectly sensible to oppose abortion and favor the death penalty - unless your reason for abortion is "thou shalt not kill", but you have microamnesia when it comes to adults.
I never said anyone had to believe anything.
>>Well hell! It's a good thing you're not painting with a really broad brush or anything!
Email me when 50% of the country doesn't consider me a "terrorist" simply because I am not a conservative. Nuance is useless today. Only big, broad ideological strokes remain. Welcome to 2005.
>>Saying that one must be against capital punishment if they're against abortion is exactly equivalent to insisting that people who dislike broccoli also dislike strawberries. It's a non-issue.
Looks like you jumped to flame me without understanding what I wrote. For good measure read the post I replied to also.
Have a nice day.
Re:Act now, before we lose the opportunity to act. (Score:3, Interesting)
This is why you work at really small companies if you don't want to be treated like a cog in the corporate machine.
Yeah, you might not get the enormous benefits package and a clear job title, but at least you keep more of your soul.
Re:suggestions for taking charge of your health (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem with 'alternative' medicines is that too few of the alternatives have been properly studied, they have been debunked, were studied by biased groups, or were studied using poor methods. Conventional medicine, while rarely offering up magic bullets, does a pretty good job telling you the sort of odds you are walking into. Alternative medicines on the other hand tend to be like setting off through a mine field. You might get something really that works, but you also might get some new age hippie bullshit.
So, if you have exhausted what conventional medicine has to offer, it isn't bad to branch out and explore a little. That said, I would be damn weary about dropping off drugs. The drugs might not be improving things, but they might be slowing down the progression of your illness or holding it steady. Further, you can try some alternatives without dropping off your drugs. There isn't a reason in the world why you have to drop off your drugs while you are trying acupuncture, meditation, or an improved diet.
Second the recommendation. (Score:3, Interesting)
My sister was hired by the NRC, coming on with a strong case of Primary MS. They accomodated her for several years (large screen monitor back when those cost a pretty penny, two hour "lunch" so she could nap midday on a cot in her office, etc), until her medical condition compelled retirement-- increased eye tremors left her unable to read a book or computer screen, even with technological assistance.
The government employee pool is large enough to be statistically self-insuring-- the health plan isn't spectacular, but it's far from bad, and a minor thing like Relapsing/Remitting MS isn't even a blip on the radar.
Re:suggestions for taking charge of your health (Score:3, Interesting)
The simple fact of the mater is that our body IS a chemical machine that can be fucked with. Give someone MDMA and they WILL become happy and empathetic. Give someone vellum and they will be indifferent to almost anything. Your emotions are controlled by the chemistry of this machine. Now, are modern day psyche drugs crude at best? Absolutely, though that has less to do with medical abilities and more to do with long held denial that people could will away mental illness that retarded any true understand of the field for years. Wishing away a mental illness is roughly as effective as wishing away diabetes.
Most people are blatantly ignorant when it comes to mental illness. Hell, I was blatantly ignorant of it until I had to watch people I was close to go through it first hand. I don't get depressed. I can't even contemplate being sad for no reason. That said, this isn't true for all people. For some people, absolutely everything could be right in the world, recognize the absolutely nothing is wrong, and they could still wish themselves dead for reasons they don't know. No amount of reasoning or yoga can fix that because it is completely irrational to begin with and purely the result of a defect in their chemistry.
There is a difference between melodramatic people looking for attention and people who are clinically depressed. I personally hope that none of the later has to have you as a friend, as the last thing they need is one more stupid asshole telling them that it is all in their head and to stop being so melodramatic. That sort of worthless advice is what drives people to try one of the more effective methods of offing themselves that you suggest.