Regulating risk: Defining genetic privacy in the United States and Britain

Science Technology and Human Values

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 332-352

  Parthasarathy, Shobita ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Activism; Comparative politics; Discrimination; Genetics; Insurance

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042554072     PISSN: 01622439     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0162243904264485     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (45)

1. Association of British Insurers. 1997a. ABI issues policy statement on life insurance and genetics. Press release. London: Author.
2. _. 1997b. Genetic testing: ABI Code of Practice. London: Author.
3. _. 1997c. Professor Raeburn's criteria for testing: Specific diseases. http://www.geneticsinsuranceform.org.uk/Criteria/bcancer.asp (accessed February 13, 2001).
4. _. 1999. Genetic testing: ABI Code of Practice. London: Author.
5. Colorado Rev. Stat. Ann. S10-3-1104.7 (West 1994 & Suppl. 1996).
6. Council for Responsible Genetics. 1997. Genetic discrimination: A position paper presented by the Council for Responsible Genetics. Press release. Cambridge, MA: Author.
7. _. 2000. Genetic discrimination legislation in the United States. http://www.gene-watch.org/programs/GD_onepage_00.html (accessed March 11, 2000).
8. Duster, T. 1990. Backdoor to eugenics. New York: Routledge.
9. Fujimura, J. 1997. Crafting science: A sociohistory of the quest for the genetics of cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10. Genetic Interest Group. 1995. GIG position paper on genetic information, insurance companies, employer and trends in social policy, with regard to the approach recommended by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in its report on human genetics. Press release. London: Author.
11. _. 1997. Annual report 1996/1997: Achieving change. London: Author.
12. Genetics and Insurance Committee. 2000a. Application for approval to use genetic test results for insurance risk assessment. London: Department of Health.
13. _. 2000b. Decision of the Genetics and Insurance Committee (GAIC) concerning the application for approval to use genetic test results for life insurance risk assessment in Huhtington's Disease. London: Department of Health.
14. Haraway, D. 1991. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminisim and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
15. Health Insurance Association of America. 1998. Health insurance and genetic information: Just the facts, please. Press release. Washington, DC: Author.
16. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Pub. L. No. 104-191, 104th Congress ed. (1996).
17. Hudson, K. L., et al. 1995. Genetic discrimination and health insurance: An urgent need for reform. Science 270:391-93.
18. Human Genetics Advisory Commission. 1997. The implications of genetic testing for insurance. London: Author.
19. Jasanoff, S. 1991. Acceptable evidence in a pluralistic society. In Acceptable evidence: Science and values in risk management, edited by Rachelle D. Hollander and Deborah G. Mayo. New York: Oxford University Press.
20. _. 1995. Product, process, or programme: Three cultures and the regulation of biotechnology. In Resistance to new technology, edited by Martin Bauer, 311-31. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. _. Forthcoming. States of knowledge: Science, Power, and political culture.
22. Kass, N. E. 1992. Insurance for the insurers: The use of genetic tests. Hastings Center Report 22. Garrison, NY: Hastings Center.
23. Latour, B., and Woolgar, S. 1986. Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24. Lippman, A. 1998. The politics of health: Geneticization versus health promotion. In The politics of women's health: Exploring agency and autonomy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
25. Murray, T. 1992. Genetics and the moral mission of health insurance. Hastings Center Report 22. Garrison, NY: Hastings Center.
26. National Action Plan on Breast Cancer. 1999. Hereditary susceptibility workshop group sunset report. Fairfax, VA: Author.
27. National Breast Cancer Coalition. 1996. Genetic testing for heritable breast cancer risk. Washington, DC: Author.
28. _. 1999a. A proposed model law to prevent genetic discrimination in health insurance. Washington, DC: Author.
29. _. 1999b. Legislation prohibiting health insurance and employment discrimination based on genetic information, http://www.natlbcc.org/agenda/ brief/p5.asp (accessed cited October 18, 1999).
30. _. 2000. National Breast Cancer Coalition: History, goals, accomplishments Washington, DC: National Breast Cancer Coalition.
31. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 1993. Genetic screening: Ethical issues. London: Author.
32. Parthasarathy, S. 2003. A global genome? Governing genetic testing for breast cancer in the United States and Britain. Ph.D. diss., Cornell University.
33. President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical Research. 1983. Screening and counseling for genetic conditions: The ethical, social, and legal implications of genetic screening, counseling, and education programs. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.
34. Rabinow, P. 1999. French DNA: Trouble in purgatory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35. Reilly, P. 1997. Laws to regulate the use of genetic information. In Genetic secrets: Protecting privacy and confidentiality in the genetic era, edited by Mark A. Rothstein. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36. Rothstein, M., ed. 1999. Genetic secrets: Protecting privacy and confidentiality in the genetic era. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
37. Shapin, S., and Shaffer, S. 1984. Leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
38. U.K. Department of Trade and Industry and Department of Health. 1998. The implications of genetic testing for insurance. London: HMSO.
39. U.K. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. 1995. Human genetics: The science and its consequences. HC231. London: HMSO.
40. U.S. Congress. 2001. Thomas: Legislative information on the Internet, http://thomas.loc.gov (accessed February 28, 2001).
41. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2000. DHHS press release on final privacy rule. Bethesda, MD: Government Printing Office.
42. U.S. House of Representatives. 1996. Health Coverage Availability and Affordability Act of 1996, 104th Congress. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
43. U.S. Senate, Committee on Labor and Human Resources. 1998. Genetic information and health care, 105th Congress. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
44. Vogel, D. 1986. National styles of regulation: Environmental policy in Great Britain and the United States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
45. Wilkie, T. 1998. Genetics and insurance in Britain: Why more than just the Atlantic divides the English-speaking nations. Nature Genetics 20:119-21.