Predictive health information in pre-employment medical examinations
The German National Ethics Council published its Opinion “Predictive health information in pre-employment medical examinations“
in August 2005. The issue addressed by this Opinion is the permissibility of making the conclusion
of a private-sector contract of employment or appointment as a permanent civil servant conditional
upon the collection and use of predictive health information. The Opinion is thus concerned with
the medical potential, the ethical evaluation and the legal limits of the use of information on the
risks of illness in the engagement of private-sector employees and permanent civil servants.
There are a number of questions arising in this context: Can a person be compelled by law or
on social grounds to generate predictive genetic information about himself and to disclose
it to third parties? If one carries a genetic predisposition to a disease that is likely,
with a certain degree of probability, to become manifest in the future, or if one is a
member of a group with a corresponding familial risk, must one expect to be disadvantaged
when, for example, seeking employment or concluding an insurance contract?
A widespread consensus exists on the need for regulation of these matters. Modern
medicine and genetics are identifying associations with genetic predispositions for more
and more disorders. Each such association permits the development of methods of examination
whereby predictive health information can be generated. The collection and use of such
information already has a statutory basis in a number of countries; a corresponding law
is in preparation in Germany. In this Opinion, the National Ethics Council considers some
of the issues in question – in particular, whether it should be permissible to make the
conclusion of a contract of employment or appointment as a permanent civil servant
conditional upon the collection and use of predictive genetic or non-genetic health
information.
The discussion concerns the striking of an appropriate balance between the interests of
the private- or public-sector employer, on the one hand, and those of the applicant for
a post or for appointment as a permanent civil servant, on the other. The issue for the
applicant is the right to informational self-determination. The knowledge that one is at
risk of developing a serious illness in the future may cause appreciable distress.
Hence no one should have such information forced on him against his will: protection of
the right of self-determination in this case entails a right to remain in ignorance.
This right may be violated if candidates are required to have their predisposition to
future illness established and to disclose it in order to preserve their prospects of
engagement for a private-sector post or appointment as a permanent civil servant.
Again, it should not be permissible for applicants for private-sector jobs or for
appointment as permanent civil servants to be unjustifiably disadvantaged (discriminated against)
because they carry a risk of developing a given disease. On the other hand, the
private- or public-sector employer has a justified interest in obtaining a fit and
efficient employee or civil servant who will not be incapacitated by illness in the
foreseeable future. An appropriate balance must be struck between these two interests.
(back to the top)
|