Insurers willing to limit scope of genetic testing
• In a bid to soften proposed federal legislation banning genetic discrimination, the nation’s life insurance industry said Tuesday it will ignore genetic test results of individuals applying for $250,000 or less of coverage.
But the statement, unveiled by a senior industry executive testifying before a Commons justice committee review of Bill S-201, was met with an angry denunciation from Liberal Chris Bittle. The St. Catharines, Ont., MP charged that the industry has known for years that demanding prospective clients disclose any genetic test results has caused many people to forego testing for themselves and their sick children and the opportunity for potential health benefits.
Bittle likened move to the eleventh-hour tactics of Big Tobacco.
“You’ve known of this for years, you’ve know about the consequences that it’s having on people’s health in Canada and yet you wait until we’re on the verge of passing a bill? That’s inexcusable, sir,” he said to Stephen Frank, senior vice-president of policy for the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association.
“This reminds me of individuals coming before (the U.S.) Congress years ago from the tobacco industry,” Bittle said. “Why should we believe you now, on the verge of passing this legislation to protect Canadians, that you are going to do right by Canadians and work for their health and best interest? Why not do this years ago when we knew that people’s lives were being impacted by decisions made by the insurance industry?”
Moments earlier, Frank said the industry “recently initiated discussions” with the provinces, which regulate insurers, to “commit to not asking for, or using, any test results” for life insurance policies of up to $250,000.
He said the concession would cover more than 85 per cent of life insurance applications, “and will address concerns around this issue for the large majority of Canadians.” He said the association hopes to have the plan in place within weeks.
Insurers strongly opposed the bill, arguing they have a legitimate right to material information that helps them accurately calculate financial risk.