Genetic discrimination and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Persons with Disabilities↗
Biomedical subjects
J S Alper
Publications and source records attributed to J S Alper.
Discrimination as a consequence of genetic testing.
Genetic discrimination refers to discrimination directed against an individual or family based solely on an apparent or perceived genetic variation from the "normal" human genotype. We describe here the results of a case history study designed to assess whether or not genetic discrimination exists. Using the above definition of genetic discrimination and applying stringent criteria for case selection, we find that genetic discrimination exists and is manifested in many social institutions, especially in the health and life insurance industries. Stigmatization, and denial of services or entitlements to individuals who have a genetic diagnosis but who are asymptomatic or who will never become significantly impaired, is noted. Follow-up comprehensive studies on the significance and varieties of genetic discrimination are needed. In order to avoid creating a new social underclass based on genetic discrimination (the "asymptomatic ill"), existing and future genetic testing or screening programs need review by medical, scientific, legal, and social policy experts, as well as the public, and may require modification.
Adult↗
Genetic screening: triumphs, problems, and controversies.
As genetic screening becomes more widespread, it becomes increasingly important to analyze the manifold implications of genetic screening programs. This paper characterizes the various types of programs and discusses some of the scientific, ethical, social, and economic issues that arise in evaluating any genetic screening program. Two examples of successful programs, newborn screening for phenylketonuria and carrier detection for Tay-Sachs disease, are presented. We then discuss three other screening programs that have not yet been fully implemented but which have already engendered a great deal of controversy: mass screening for heterozygosity for cystic fibrosis, DNA fingerprinting in the criminal justice system, and genetic screening in the workplace.
Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
Lumsden-Wilson theory of gene-culture coevolution.
A critique is presented of the Lumsden-Wilson theory [Lumsden, C. J. & Wilson, E. O. (1980) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77, 4382-4386] of the transmission of cultural traits. An analysis of the underlying assumptions and the mathematical nature of the theory clarifies its essentially reductionist and determinist qualities. The mathematical functions governing the transition probability that an individual member of a group of a specified size will switch from one trait to an alternative form of that trait is assumed to be genetically controlled although the single independent variable of this function, the number of individuals characterized by each of the two forms of the trait, is environmentally determined. The model assumes that the cultural properties of a society are simply the sum of the properties of the individuals; that each individual is equally influenced by every other member of the group; and that kinship structures, cultural institutions, and historical factors can be neglected.
Journal Article↗
Genetic fatalism and social policy: the implications of behavior genetics research.
Recent advances in molecular genetics methods have provided new means of determining the genetic bases of human behavioral traits. The impetus for the use of these approaches for specific behaviors depends, in large part, on previous familial studies on inheritance of such traits. In the past, a finding of a genetic basis for a trait was often accompanied with the idea that that trait is unchangeable. We discuss the definition of "genetic trait" and heritability and examine the relationship between these concepts and the malleability of traits for both molecular and nonmolecular approaches to behavioral genetics. We argue that the malleability of traits is as much a social and political question as it is a biological one and that whether or not a trait is genetic has little relevance to questions concerning determinism, free will, and individual responsibility for actions. We conclude by noting that "scientific objectivity" should not be used to conceal the social perspectives that underlie proposals regarding social change.
Female↗