Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Mar 17:12:643304.
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2021.643304. eCollection 2021.

Employees' Views and Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Assessment of Voluntary Workplace Genomic Testing

Kunal Sanghavi  1 , W Gregory Feero  2 , Debra J H Mathews  3 , Anya E R Prince  4 , Lori Lyn Price  5   6 , Edison T Liu  1 , Kyle B Brothers  7 , J Scott Roberts  8   9 , Charles Lee  1   10
Affiliations

Employees' Views and Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Assessment of Voluntary Workplace Genomic Testing

Kunal Sanghavi et al. Front Genet. .

Abstract

Employers have begun to offer voluntary workplace genomic testing (wGT) as part of employee wellness benefit programs, but few empirical studies have examined the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of wGT. To better understand employee perspectives on wGT, employees were surveyed at a large biomedical research institution. Survey respondents were presented with three hypothetical scenarios for accessing health-related genomic testing: via (1) their doctor; (2) their workplace; and 3) a commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing company. Overall, 594 employees (28%) responded to the survey. Respondents indicated a preference for genomic testing in the workplace setting (70%; 95% CI 66-74%), followed by doctor's office (54%; 95% CI 50-58%), and DTC testing (20%; 95% CI 17-24%). Prior to participating in wGT, respondents wanted to know about confidentiality of test results (79%), existence of relevant laws and policies (70%), and privacy protection (64%). Across scenarios, 92% of respondents preferred to view the test results with a genetic counselor. These preliminary results suggest that many employees are interested and even prefer genetic testing in the workplace and would prefer testing with support from genetic health professionals. Confirmation in more diverse employer settings will be needed to generalize such findings.

Keywords: ELSI; employees; genetic health professionals; workplace genomic testing; workplace wellness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

    1. Annas G. J. (2001). The limits of state laws to protect genetic information. N. Engl. J. Med. 345 385–388. 10.1056/nejm200108023450523 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boddington P. (2009). The ethics and regulation of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Genome Med. 1:71. 10.1186/gm71 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brandt-Rauf P. W., Brandt-Rauf S. I. (2004). Genetic testing in the workplace: ethical, legal, and social implications. Annu. Rev. Public Health 25 139–153. 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.25.101802.123012 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brandt-Rauf S. I., Brandt-Rauf E., Gershon R., Brandt-Rauf P. W. (2011). The differing perspectives of workers and occupational medicine physicians on the ethical, legal and social issues of genetic testing in the workplace. New Solut. 21 89–102. 10.2190/ns.21.1.j - DOI - PubMed
    1. Burke W., Trinidad S. B., Schenck D. (2019). Can precision medicine reduce the burden of diabetes? Ethn. Dis. 29(Suppl. 3), 669–674. 10.18865/ed.29.s3.669 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources