From the deontological perspective gene testing is absolutely unacceptable. To put it more precisely, genetic testing offends existing moral and ethical norms and rules. In fact, a considerable part of the society opposes to genetic researches because they contradict to existing ethical and moral norms. Therefore, genetic testing in the workplace is a challenge to existing social norms and rules.
In addition, genetic testing can affect religious beliefs of individuals. In this regard, the violation of ethical norms is closely intertwined with the violation of legal norms because individuals are free to worship any religion they like and employers should respect their religious beliefs. For instance, many Christians believe that genetic studies are attempts of scientists to play God. Therefore, genetic testing is just another manifestation of human attempts to play God. Naturally, employees with strong religious beliefs cannot pass through genetic testing.
Moreover, genetic testing increases the risk of the discrimination of employees. At this point, genetic testing again violates not only ethical but also legal norms, although the existing legislation fails to encompass genetic researches and discrimination on the genetic ground. Nevertheless, genetic testing contradicts to principles of equality because employees may fail to pass genetic testing, although they may have equal or even better professional qualities and characteristics compared to other applicants but the failure to pass genetic testing can prevent them from employment. In fact, such policies of employers are close to racism but it is racism of the new generation, when genetic differences become the basis for the recruitment of employees.
Finally, genetic testing cannot reveal actual problems in employees’ health, for instance, but it rather reveals inclination of employees to some problems. Therefore, results of genetic testing lead to rather hypothetical conclusions than to real and objective ones. Objective conclusions can be obtained only on the ground of testing of employees’ current skills, abilities, health and other issues important for employers and safety in the workplace. In fact, this means that genetic testing cannot provide reliable results concerning the current qualification of employees, their current state of health and other important issues, which are normally taken into consideration. As it has been already mentioned above genetic testing can show that an employee has inclination to have mental health problems, but at the moment he or she does not have them. However, if an employer uses genetic tests, this employee is likely to fail the testing and he or she will not be employed. Such a situation is paradoxical because even well-qualified employees may fail to pass genetic test. In fact, such practices are unethical and doubtful from the legal standpoint because they are closely intertwined with employees’ discrimination and offense of their moral values and beliefs. Therefore, genetic testing cannot be implemented in the course of recruitment and employment from the deontological perspective.
Thus, on analyzing the current situation concerning genetic testing, it is worth mentioning the fact that genetic testing is highly controversial. On the one hand, genetic testing is efficient from the utilitarian perspective. Genetic testing can identify employees, who may have substantial problems, while performing their professional duties. Therefore, genetic testing is justified from the utilitarian perspective. On the other hand, genetic testing is absolutely unacceptable from the deontological perspective. To put it more precisely, genetic testing offends moral and religious views of employees and, what is more, genetic testing is questionable from the legal ground because it can be viewed as the manifestation of discrimination from the part of employers in relation to employees, who fail to pass genetic testing, regardless of their professional characteristics.
Cunningham, W.P. and Cunningham, M.A. (2006). Principles of Environmental Science: Inquiry and Applications (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Duin, J. (1999, July). “Reckless reproduction?” Insight on the News 15 (26), 41.
Easton, T. (2006). Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues (14th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Miller, P.S. (Summer 2007). “Genetic Testing and the Future of Disability Insurance: Thinking about Discrimination in the Genetic Age.” The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 35(2), p. 47-53.
Schafer, S. (2001). “Railroad Agrees to Stop Gene-Testing Workers.” Washington Post, p. E01.