Genetics, society and insurance Margo Trappenburg Universiteit Utrecht USBO
Professor John Harris (1945) University of Manchester
General ethical theories Utilitarian philosophy, e.g. John Harris: maximize overall happiness. Ambition sensitive and endowment insensitive.
This is not the way we do it Moral norms are different in different political communities. E.g.: abortion/PND in China, India versus abortion in Europa, US E.g. euthanasia in US versus euthanasia in the Netherlands
Spheres of justice in liberal countries Political sphere Majority decides Divine grace Sphere of the market Free exchange Love and affection Medical care Education Welfare -- --
Sphere of medical care Distribution according to need (not according to wealth, guilt, not ‘ambition sensitive’) Genetic technology was first developed in this sphere.
Genetics in the sphere of health care IVF according to medical need PND for medical reasons PGD for medical reasons
Crossing borders I Using medical technology (e.g. genetics) for non medical purposes: debate about eugenics Politicalsphere Health care Market Free exchange
Crossing borders II Having a medical condition while being a consumer Some analogies
Buying life insurance The history of genetic exceptionalism Ambition sensitive and endowment insensitive after all? Ine van Hoyweghen, Risks in the Making. Travels in Life Insurance and Genetics 2007
Abandoning genetic exceptionalism? What would happen? Small group? Large group? Is life insurance justly perceived as a market good? If not, what is it?
Conclusion Abandoning genetic exceptionalism seems the right thing to do provided we manage to keep other societal spheres (education, medical care, welfare) free from market interference.