Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
In the paper ‘Genetic information, insurance, and a pluralistic approach to justice’, Jonathan Pugh1 develops an argument from unresolved pluralism in our theories of justice, via the pluralism this occasions in relation to the specific question of the use of genetic test results (GTRs) in insurance underwriting, to the conclusion that the UK regulatory approach in relation to the use of GTRs in insurance is broadly correct.1 Pugh’s argument is wide-ranging and I cannot provide a complete critique of it in this short comment, but I will gesture towards some strands of the argument that are potentially problematic.
The first potential problem in the argument is that Pugh bases his argument on a very extensive range of accounts of justice, including pure maximising consequentialism (he calls it ‘utilitarianism’), strict egalitarianism and libertarianism, among many others. If these are all accounts of justice, it is not strange that there is pluralism of conclusions in relation to a specific question of justice or discrimination, such as the use of GTRs in the underwriting of specific kinds of insurance contracts. Pugh’s range, for instance, includes accounts of justice that deny the direct importance of distributive concerns as well as accounts that see distributive concerns as crucial. These accounts disagree not only about the answer to Pugh’s question but also about …
Footnotes
Contributors Single authored.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Genetic information, insurance and a pluralistic approach to justice
- Genetic exceptionalism, revisionism, pluralism and convergence in the ethics of insurance: response to commentators
- A step forward, but still inadequate: Australian health professionals’ views on the genetics and life insurance moratorium
- Is genetic information relevantly different from other kinds of non-genetic information in the life insurance context?
- Genetic discrimination in life insurance: a human rights issue
- 53 GENETIC DISCRIMINATION BY INSURERS AS A RESULT OF GENETIC RESEARCH AND TESTING: A COMPARISON OF NATIONAL POLICIES
- Genetic discrimination in life insurance: empirical evidence from a cross sectional survey of genetic support groups in the United Kingdom
- Getting insurance after genetic screening on familial hypercholesterolaemia; the need to educate both insurers and the public to increase adherence to national guidelines in the Netherlands
- Ethics briefings
- UK insurers agree five year ban on using genetic tests