Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T00:35:00.204Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the ADA Provide Protection Against Discrimination on the Basis of Genotype?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Joseph S. Alper
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As a consequence of the problems caused by genetic discrimination, federal and state law makers are being pressured to pass a legislative remedy. A primary question is whether the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) applies to (1) individuals with a potentially disabling genetic disorder who are pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic and may never become ill and to (2) healthy individuals who are carriers of genetic conditions. At present, this question has relevance principally for individuals with the genotype for single gene disorders, like Huntington disease and hemochromatosis, and to asymptomatic carriers of single gene disorders such as cystic fibrosis. Although many such single gene conditions exist, the total incidence of these conditions in the U.S. population is less than 0.4 percent. However, the question concerning the applicability of the ADA will become increasingly important because genetic tests will almost certainly be developed in the near future for common multifactorial diseases like diabetes, heart disease, and certain forms of cancer.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , Summer 1995 , pp. 167 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

See Andrews, L.B. Fullarton, J.E. Holtzman, N.A. Motulsky, A.G., eds., Assessing Genetic Risks: Implications for Health and Social Policy (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1994): Ch. 8; and Gostin, L., “Genetic Discrimination: The Use of Genetically Based Diagnostic and Prognostic Tests by Employers and Insurers,” American Journal of Law & Medicine, XVII (1991): 109–44.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–12213 (1990).Google Scholar
Thompson, M.W. McInnes, R.R. Willard, H.F., Thompson & Thompson: Genetics in Medicine (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 5th ed., 1991): at 10. It should be noted that the number of healthy carriers of recessive single gene disorders is much higher than the number of individuals actually affected by the disease. For example, while the incidence of cystic fibrosis in the Caucasian population is approximately 1 in 2000, the frequency of carriers is approximately 1 in 22. See id. at 67.Google Scholar
Lander, E.S. Schork, N.J., “Genetic Analysis of Complex Traits,” Science, 265 (1994): 2037–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calkins, P.B., Letter from Acting Director of Communications and Legislative Affairs, EEOC, to Johnson, Patrick, Senate of the State of California, June 23, 1993.Google Scholar
Thornton, E.M., Letter from Deputy Legal Counsel, EEOC, to Paul Berg and Sheldon Wolff, Co-Chairmen of NIH-DOE Joint Subcommittee on the Human Genome, Aug. 2, 1991.Google Scholar
Natowicz, M.R. Alper, J.K. Alper, J.S., “Genetic Discrimination and the Law,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 50 (1992): 465–75; and Alper, J.S. Natowicz, M.R., “Genetic Discrimination and the Public Entities and Public Accommodations Titles of the Americans with Disabilities Act,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 53 (1993): 26–32.Google Scholar
Natowicz, , Alper, and Alper, , supra note 7.Google Scholar
136 Cong. Rec. H4623 (daily ed. July 12, 1990) (statement of Rep. Owens); 136 Cong. Rec. H4624-25 (daily ed. July 12, 1990) (statement of Rep. Edwards); 136 Cong. Rec. H4627 (daily ed. July 12, 1990) (statement of Rep. Waxman).Google Scholar
136 Cong. Rec. H4623 (daily ed. July 12, 1990).Google Scholar
Holtzman, N.A. Rothstein, M.A., “Invited Editorial: Eugenics and Genetic Discrimination,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 50 (1992): 457–59.Google Scholar
Blumenthal, R., Letter from Acting Director of Communications and Legislative Affairs, EEOC, to Representative Bob Wise, Chairman, House Subcommittee on Government Information, Justice and Agriculture, Nov. 22, 1991.Google Scholar
Natowicz, M.R. Alper, J.K. Alper, J.S., “Genetic Discrimination and the Americans with Disabilities Act,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 51 (1992): 895–97.Google Scholar
EEOC, Compliance Manual, Vol. 2, EEOC Order No. 915.002, § 902 (Mar. 14, 1995).Google Scholar
See Alper, and Natowicz, , supra note 7.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. § 12101(3)2 (1990).Google Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity for Individuals with Disabilities, Final Rule, 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(h) App. (1991).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §§ 791–94 (1988).Google Scholar
29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(h) App. (1991).Google Scholar
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (Boston: American Heritage Publishing and Houghton Mifflin, 1969) (emphasis added).Google Scholar
Thompson, , McInnes, , and Willard, , supra note 3, at 41.Google Scholar
Id. at 33.Google Scholar
See id. at 116–17 for the “anatomy” of gene mutations.Google Scholar
See id. at ch. 12 for the “physiology,” the mechanisms by which mutations result in abnormal function and disease.Google Scholar
Id. at 83.Google Scholar
Lander, and Schork, , supra note 4.Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. § 1630.2(h) App. (1991); H.R. Judiciary Rep. No. 101–485, 101st Cong., 2d Sess., pt. 3, at 28 (1990); S. Labor and Human Resources Rep. No. 101–116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess., at 22 (1989).Google Scholar
See Cain v. Hyatt, 734 F. Supp. 671, 679 (E.D. Pa. 1990); and Doe v. Kohn Nast & Graf, 862 F. Supp. 1310, 1321 (E.D. Pa. 1994). In Cain, the plaintiff had full-blown AIDS and was clearly disabled. In dictum, the judge found that even if asymptomatic, an individual's HIV infection constitutes a substantial limitation on the major life activity of procreation. In Doe, the plaintiff was HIV-positive, but was only minimally symptomatic. The judge in this case found that the language of the ADA “does not preclude procreation as a major life activity” (Doe, 862 F. Supp. at 1320 (E.D. Pa. 1994)), and cited the dictum in Cain in reaching the conclusion that HIV-positive status does constitute a physical impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, and thus is a disability within the meaning of the ADA (id. at 1321).Google Scholar
29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(h) App. (1991).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Edwards, C.Q. Kushner, J.P., “Screening for Hemochromatosis,” N. Engl. J. Med., 328 (1993): 1616–20.Google Scholar
Alper, J.S. et al., “Genetic Discrimination and Screening for Hemochromatosis,” Journal of Public Health Policy, 15 (1994): 345–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, J.L. et al., “A Genome-Wide Search for Human Type 1 Diabetes Susceptibility Genes,” Nature, 371 (1994): 130–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42 U.S.C. § 12111, note (1990).Google Scholar
29 U.S.C. §§ 701–94 (1988).Google Scholar
Bentivegna v. U.S. Dept. of Labor, 694 F.2d 619, 622–23 (9th Cir. 1982); Mantolete v. Bolger, 757 F.2d 1416, 1422 (9th Cir. 1985); and School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 284 (1987).Google Scholar
Ray v. School Dist. of DeSoto County, 666 F. Supp. 1524 (M.D. Fla. 1987); Doe v. Centinela Hosp., No. CV 87-2514 (C.D. Cal. 1988); and Doe v. District of Columbia, 796 F. Supp. 559, 568 (D.D.C. 1992).Google Scholar
E.E. Black, Ltd. v. Marshall, 497 F. Supp. 1088 (D. Haw. 1980).Google Scholar
Doe v. Kohn Nast & Graf, 862 F. Supp. 1310 (E.D. Pa. 1994).Google Scholar
Id. at 1321. The regulations cited are 28 C.F.R. § 35.104(a) (1991); and 28 C.F.R. § 36.104(a) (1991).Google Scholar
U.S. v. Morvant et al., 843 F. Supp. 1092 (E.D. La. 1994).Google Scholar
McEwen, J.E. Reilly, P.R., “State Legislative Efforts to Regulate Use and Potential Misuse of Genetic Information,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 51 (1992): 637–47.Google Scholar
1994 Cal. Stats. ch. 761.Google Scholar
29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(l) App. (1991). The Supreme Court case cited is School Bd. v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273 (1987).Google Scholar
29 C.F.R. § 1630.14(b)(3) (1991).Google Scholar
Billings, P.R. et al., “Discrimination as a Consequence of Genetic Testing,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 50 (1992): 476–82.Google Scholar
Geller, L.N. et al., “Individual, Family, and Societal Dimensions of Genetic Discrimination: A National Survey,” unpublished.Google Scholar