Anti-genetic discrimination bill hits snag
OTTAWA • Full Liberal support for proposed national legislation to outlaw genetic discrimination is in doubt over concern it could intrude on provincial control of the health insurance industry.
The constitutional worry surfaced Tuesday at the start of committee hearings on Bill S-201, which would impose criminal liability on employers, insurers and others who discriminate against individuals based on their genetic makeup and predisposition to developing diseases and other illnesses.
A broader ethical debate is taking shape, too, over whether limits should be placed on what people and companies can do with the discoveries, products and knowledge flowing from the rapid commercialization of genetic science.
Already, there is overwhelming evidence that fears about insurance coverage and costs are discouraging Canadians from taking advantage of a biotechnology capable of tremendous potential health benefits, including targeted health care based on their individual genome.
But health insurers strongly oppose the bill, arguing they have a legitimate right to material information that helps them accurately calculate financial risk.
While the Liberals are poised to support the bill’s provision to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to ban discrimination based on genetics against federally regulated employees, they have yet to embrace the bill’s other key provisions: creation of a genetic non-discrimination act and changes to the Canada Labour Code to protect employees from being forced to undergo or to disclose the results of a genetic test, among other protections.
“We’re not going to prejudge the outcome of the committee, but we certainly have questions and concerns around constitutionality that we’re going to want thoroughly probed,” Liberal MP Sean Casey, parliamentary secretary to Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, told reporters following the hearing.
If passed, the law would bring Canada in line with all other Group of Seven nations and would be backed with criminal sanctions and maximum fines of $300,000 and $1 million, depending on the severity of the offence.
S-201, a private member’s bill authored by Senate Liberal James Cowan, won Senate approval in May and unanimous support from the Commons in October for the House justice committee to investigate.
Insurers “now have access to genetic test information, and they understandably don’t want to relinquish that access,” Cowan told the committee Tuesday. “They say that terrible things will happen to insurance in this country if this bill passes. But there are many countries around the world with prohibitions in place like the ones in S-201, and the insurance industry continues and does just fine.”
In testimony before a Senate committee this year, insurance industry officials insisted prospective and existing policy holders must disclose any material information relevant to assessing the risk of insuring them and setting a premium reflecting the degree of risk.
It’s the same, the industry argues, as people now do when disclosing family histories regarding cholesterol, hypertension, coronary heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other conditions with a genetic component.
An industry code already makes a concession when it comes to genetic information; Canadians cannot be asked to take a genetic test as a condition of obtaining life insurance. Still, insurers may ask that previous genetic test results be made available.