PET PET
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
Become a Friend Donate
  • About Us
    • People
    • Press Office
    • Our History
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Friend of PET
    • Volunteer
    • Campaigns
    • Writing Scheme
    • Partnership and Sponsorship
    • Advertise with Us
  • Donate
    • Become a Friend of PET
  • BioNews
    • News
    • Comment
    • Reviews
    • Elsewhere
    • Topics
    • Glossary
    • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Previous Events
  • Engagement
    • Policy and Projects
      • Resources
    • Education
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
    • People
    • Press Office
    • Our History
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Friend of PET
    • Volunteer
    • Campaigns
    • Writing Scheme
    • Partnership and Sponsorship
    • Advertise with Us
  • Donate
    • Become a Friend of PET
  • BioNews
    • News
    • Comment
    • Reviews
    • Elsewhere
    • Topics
    • Glossary
    • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Previous Events
  • Engagement
    • Policy and Projects
      • Resources
    • Education
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements
PETBioNewsCommentGenes and insurance debate hots up

BioNews

Genes and insurance debate hots up

Published 18 June 2009 posted in Comment and appears in BioNews 102

Author

Juliet Tizzard

Image by Peter Artymiuk via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts the shadow of a DNA double helix, on a background that shows the fluorescent banding of the output from a DNA sequencing machine.
CC BY 4.0
Image by Peter Artymiuk via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts the shadow of a DNA double helix, on a background that shows the fluorescent banding of the sequencing output from an automated DNA sequencing machine.

The issue of what kind of access insurers should have to its customers' genetic test results has been knocking around for a few years now. But whilst the main protagonists have taken their time to mull over the issues, the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee decided to...

The issue of what kind of access insurers should have to its customers' genetic test results has been knocking around for a few years now. But whilst the main protagonists have taken their time to mull over the issues, the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee decided to take a more speedy approach. Setting up a short enquiry in December 2000, the committee has come up with a lengthy list of recommendations in just three months.

The committee's principal recommendation is that the insurance industry agrees to a two-year moratorium on the use of any positive genetic test results when deciding upon insurance premiums. If accepted, the moratorium would mean that insurers must take note of customers' genetic tests which demonstrate that they will not develop a particular genetic disease which is in their family. Test results which do indicate a raised risk, however, should, according to the committee, be ignored.


Press coverage of the Science and Technology Committee's report focused upon its criticisms of the insurance industry, raising questions about how much insurers can be trusted to regulate themselves. But the government received its own ticking off from the MPs. 'The previous unwillingness of government to become involved in this area,' the report observed, 'has contributed to the atmosphere of confusion and ignorance that pervades the use of genetic test results.'


Confusion certainly exists. The report lists a handful of insurance companies and their respective policies on genetic test results. Some comply with Association of British Insurers (ABI) code of practice (which permits the use of test results for seven genetic conditions). Others prefer an abbreviated version, using just four genetic tests. One or two comply with the tests the Genetics and Insurance Committee (GAIC) has approved (only Huntington's at present). The most embarrassing finding for the insurance industry must surely be that, at times, companies were unsure of their own policies.


Before the government steps in with legislation or accedes to the Science and Technology Committee's request for a moratorium, perhaps clear and accurate information would be helpful. If insurers are up-front about their genetic test policies, prospective customers can at least make an informed decision about where to apply for insurance.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

« Reproductive cloning isn't safe

Data-Label The UK's Leading Supplier Of Medical Labels & Asset Labels

RetiringDentist.co.uk The UK's Leading M&A Company.
easyfundraising
amazon

This month in BioNews

  • Recent
4 July 2022 • 4 minutes read

Widening the debate about direct-to-consumer genetic testing and donor conception

4 July 2022 • 3 minutes read

Join PET and Genomics England to celebrate the 200th birthday of Gregor Mendel

27 June 2022 • 4 minutes read

Thirty years of PET: our 'Fertility, Genomics and Embryo Research' report

27 June 2022 • 5 minutes read

Children's rights and donor conception: What next?

20 June 2022 • 4 minutes read

The problems with lifting donor anonymity earlier

Subscribe to BioNews and other PET updates for free.

Subscribe
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS
Wellcome
Website redevelopment supported by Wellcome.

Website by Impact Media Impact Media

  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements

© 1992 - 2022 Progress Educational Trust. All rights reserved.

Limited company registered in England and Wales no 07405980 • Registered charity no 1139856

Subscribe to BioNews and other PET updates for free.

Subscribe
PET PET

PET is an independent charity that improves choices for people affected by infertility and genetic conditions.

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS
Wellcome
Website redevelopment supported by Wellcome.

Navigation

  • About Us
  • Get Involved
  • Donate
  • BioNews
  • Events
  • Engagement
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us

BioNews

  • News
  • Comment
  • Reviews
  • Elsewhere
  • Topics
  • Glossary
  • Newsletters

Other

  • My Account
  • Subscribe

Website by Impact Media Impact Media

  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements

© 1992 - 2022 Progress Educational Trust. All rights reserved.

Limited company registered in England and Wales no 07405980 • Registered charity no 1139856