Privacy Digest

News that can impact your privacy.
Login/Register
What is OpenID?
  • Log in using OpenID
  • Cancel OpenID login
  • Create new account
  • Request new password
Home Blogs MacRonin's blog
    • FAQ
    • Wishlists
    • Contact
    • Categories/RSS

Bookmark Us

Bookmark Privacy Digest 
Bookmark This Page 

Syndicate

Syndicate content
more

Advertisements

Tracking System
GPS Tracking
Tracking System
Private Detectives
Quality Security Services in California
Fleet Management
Hosting

Popular content

Last viewed:

  • Judge Refuses to Lift 5-Year-Old Patriot Act Gag Order
  • Considering Privacy in the Data Storage Cloud While in Sunny Madrid
  • Cryptographer Warns that Math Errors in Computer Chips Could Be a Global Security Risk
  • Mac Users Get A Credit Card Stealing Trojan for Halloween, Security Company Reports
  • UK Police to continue to hold DNA of innocent people | Politics | The Guardian
  • Three National Privacy Experts to Address Arizona Legislators on Privacy Issues Related to REAL ID, RFID Tags
  • Nark on Your Boss, Get Cool Cash

tags in Topics

Activists Alert Companies Congress Copyright Court (US) Databases Data Mining Editorial EFF Entertainment Exploits Fourth Amendment Government Hmmm ID Infrastructure Law Enforcement Laws Politics Privacy Remember Reports Rights Security Software Spin Zone Surveillance Telecommunications Tracking
more tags

View blog authority
Congressional Research
Broadcast Flag

Uses of Medical Histories Are Curtailed Under a New Law

Submitted by MacRonin on November 16, 2009 - 4:20pm
  • Alert
  • Companies
  • Congress
  • Databases
  • DNA & Genetics
  • Enacted Laws
  • Hewitt Associates
  • HIPAA
  • Hmmm
  • J. D. Piro
  • Laws
  • Person Career
  • Privacy
  • Quotation
  • Remember
  • Rights

Uses of Medical Histories Are Curtailed Under a New Law: Via NYTimes.com .

The most important new antidiscrimination law in two decades — the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act — will take effect in the nation’s workplaces next weekend, prohibiting employers from requesting genetic testing or considering someone’s genetic background in hiring, firing or promotions.

The act also prohibits health insurers and group plans from requiring such testing or using genetic information — like a family history of heart disease — to deny coverage or set premiums or deductibles.

“It doesn’t matter who’s asking for genetic information, if it’s the employer or the insurer, the point is you can’t ask for it,” said John C. Stivarius Jr., a trial lawyer based in Atlanta who advises businesses about the new law.

The biggest change resulting from the law is that it will — except in a few circumstances — prohibit employers and health insurers from asking employees to give their family medical histories. The law also bans group health plans from the common practice of rewarding workers, often with lower premiums or one-time payments, if they give their family medical histories when completing health risk questionnaires.

“Genetic information is very broad,” said J. D. Piro, a principal in the Health Care Law Group at Hewitt Associates. “It doesn’t simply include my own genetic information, such as do I have a risk for cancer. It also includes my family medical history — do I have any relatives who have had cancer or leukemia.”

[...]

The new law (called GINA) was passed by Congress last year because many Americans feared that if they had a genetic test, their employers or health insurers would discriminate against them, perhaps by firing them or denying coverage. In a nationwide survey, 63 percent of respondents said they would not have genetic testing if employers could see the results.

“The message to employees is they should now be able to get whatever genetic counseling or testing they need and be less fearful about doing so,” said Peggy R. Mastroianni, associate legal counsel for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The act takes effect Nov. 21 for all employers with 15 or more employees. It applies to group health insurers whose plan years begin on or after Dec. 7, and it took effect for individual health insurance plans last May. The act does not apply to life insurers.

The act would ban a company from not promoting a 49-year-old to chief executive because it knew his father and grandfather died of heart attacks at age 50.

“There’s an absolute ban on the use of genetic information to make any kind of decision about employment,” said Christopher Kuczynski, assistant legal counsel with the commission.

[...]

One episode that created momentum for the legislation involved the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company, which conducted genetic testing on several employees without their permission.

David Escher, a track maintenance worker in Nebraska who developed carpal tunnel syndrome on both wrists, said he was mystified why Burlington Northern ordered him to see a doctor who drew seven vials of his blood. Mr. Escher later learned that the railroad wanted to do genetic testing to determine whether he had a predisposition for carpal tunnel — in an effort to reduce its medical and workers’ compensation costs.

[...]

While the act makes it illegal for employers to intentionally acquire genetic information, it includes a “water cooler” exception, as in a case where a manager overhears one employee telling another that his father had a stroke.

Under the act, it is legal for a manager to garner genetic information from an obituary, for instance that an employee’s mother died of breast cancer. And if a manager asks why a worker took off a week to care for his father under the Family Medical Leave Act, it generally will not be considered illegal if the employer learns that the worker’s father has pancreatic cancer.

The act, however, prohibits use of such inadvertent knowledge to alter the terms, conditions or privileges of employment.

[...]

Mr. Piro of Hewitt said many employers were only now realizing that their health risk questionnaires might violate the law.

“Employers have to scramble to scrub this information out,” he said. “The alternative is to modify their reward structures so that they’re not considered to be purchasing or requiring the genetic information.”

Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, said the rules were a challenge for insurers because they take effect during the open enrollment period. She said her group disagreed with the federal agencies’ interpretation that the law bans incentives to encourage employees to fill out family medical histories.

Read Original Article:(Via NYTimes.com .)

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Twitter Twitter
  • Digg Digg
  • StumbleUpon StumbleUpon
  • Technorati Technorati
  • del.icio.us del.icio.us
  • Facebook Facebook
  • Furl Furl
  • LinkedIn LinkedIn
  • Yahoo Yahoo
  • MacRonin's blog
  • Add new comment

Recent blog posts

  • EFF Asks Court to Suppress Evidence Illegally Gathered From Password-Protected Phone
  • Google Superbowl Ad Explains The Need for Search Privacy
  • EFF Fights for Cell Phone Users' Privacy in Thursday Hearing
  • Identifying John Doe: It might be easier than you think
  • ShmooCon: Inside FarmVille's sinister underbelly
  • More Details on the Chinese Attack Against Google (Schneier)
  • The top 5 mistakes of privacy awareness programs
  • ShmooCon: P2P snoopers know what's in your wallet
  • Can you trust Chinese computer equipment?
  • Authors Guild: ‘To RIAA or Not to RIAA’
more

Performancing Metrics

Compilation © Copyright 1997-2010 Paul Hardwick, with Web Hosting provided by MacRonin.com.