Dna Testing in the Hiring Process
DNA Testing in the Hiring Process
5 Theory Approach
In modern society, businesses are always trying to improve their model, employees, and product. Companies naturally wish to hire the best employees they possibly can, and avoid those that might harm or hinder their growth. In the past of the United States, many companies have taken these aspirations so far as to incite legislation intended to protect the rights of individuals from those of a business. Laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and the U.S. Equal Opportunity laws both exist to ensure that Americans are generally not denied employment due to circumstances beyond their fault or control (United States Department of Labor, n.d.). More recently, the idea of DNA screening has become a topic of interest in order for companies to use information gained from prospective employee’s genes to hire the best people for the job. To combat this idea, the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act of 2008 was established to prevent companies from taking advantage of science (and people) to further their own personal growth (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d.). It is because of our society’s way of thought and concepts of right and wrong that laws such as these have been accepted into the United States government. Other ways of thought are possible however, and many are used in the world today. Some may even openly accept the concept of eugenics and DNA screening as they do have some benefits to either businesses or individuals, and perhaps society as a whole. Such ways of thinking include Ethical Fundamentalism, Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics, Rawl’s Social Justice Theory, and Ethical Relativism. Each society that follows one of these ideals would see the idea of DNA screening in a different way and possibly alter the outcome for businesses and individuals that utilize the results of these screenings.
Utilitarianism From a Utilitarian point of view, every individual’s
5 Theory Approach
In modern society, businesses are always trying to improve their model, employees, and product. Companies naturally wish to hire the best employees they possibly can, and avoid those that might harm or hinder their growth. In the past of the United States, many companies have taken these aspirations so far as to incite legislation intended to protect the rights of individuals from those of a business. Laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and the U.S. Equal Opportunity laws both exist to ensure that Americans are generally not denied employment due to circumstances beyond their fault or control (United States Department of Labor, n.d.). More recently, the idea of DNA screening has become a topic of interest in order for companies to use information gained from prospective employee’s genes to hire the best people for the job. To combat this idea, the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act of 2008 was established to prevent companies from taking advantage of science (and people) to further their own personal growth (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d.). It is because of our society’s way of thought and concepts of right and wrong that laws such as these have been accepted into the United States government. Other ways of thought are possible however, and many are used in the world today. Some may even openly accept the concept of eugenics and DNA screening as they do have some benefits to either businesses or individuals, and perhaps society as a whole. Such ways of thinking include Ethical Fundamentalism, Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics, Rawl’s Social Justice Theory, and Ethical Relativism. Each society that follows one of these ideals would see the idea of DNA screening in a different way and possibly alter the outcome for businesses and individuals that utilize the results of these screenings.
Utilitarianism From a Utilitarian point of view, every individual’s
References: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=31785 http://www.scientific.org/tutorials/articles/riley/riley.html U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (n.d). Retrieved July 30, 2010, from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/genetic.cfm. United States Department of Labor. (n.d). Hiring Issues. Retrieved July 30, 2010, from http://www.dol.gov/compliance/topics/hiring-issues.htm. Coalition for Genetic Fairness. (n.d). How Does GINA impact ME? Retrieved July 30, 2010, from http://www.geneticfairness.org/ginaresource_impact.html#2. Halbert, T., & Ingulli E. (2009). Utilitarian: Assessing Consequences. In Law & Ethics In The Business Environment (6th ed.) (pp. 12-14). Thomson West. Pulver, Roberto. (1992). Genetic Screening in the Workplace: A “Fit” for Consumers. 5 Loy. Consumer L. Rep. 13 1992-1993. Retrieved July 30, 2010, from http://heinonline.org. Billings, P. R., & Kohn, M. A., & Cuevas, M., & Beckwith, J., & Alper, J. S., & et al. (1992). Discrimination as a Consequence of Genetic Testing. (pp. 1-7). Retrieved July 30, 2010, from www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.