A step forward, but still inadequate: Australian health professionals' views on the genetics and life insurance moratorium.

Autor:	Tiller JM; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia jane.tiller@monash.edu.; Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia., Keogh LA; Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia., McInerney-Leo AM; Human Genomics Group, University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia., Belcher A; The University of Queensland, Faculty of Medicine, Herston, Queensland, Australia.; Australian Genomics, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia., Barlow-Stewart K; The University of Sydney, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia., Boughtwood T; Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.; Australian Genomics, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia., Gleeson P; School of Law, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia., Dowling G; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia., Prince A; The University of Iowa College of Law, Iowa City, Iowa, USA., Bombard Y; University of Toronto, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada., Joly Y; Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada., Delatycki M; Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.; Victorian Clinical Genetics Services Ltd, Parkville, Victoria, Australia., Winship IM; Clinical Genetics, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.; Department of Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia., Otlowski M; University of Tasmania, Faculty of Law, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia., Lacaze P; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of medical genetics [J Med Genet] 2022 Aug; Vol. 59 (8), pp. 817-826. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Sep 20.
DOI:	10.1136/jmedgenet-2021-107989
Abstrakt:	Background: In 2019, the Australian life insurance industry introduced a partial moratorium (ban) limiting the use of genetic test results in life insurance underwriting. The moratorium is industry self-regulated and applies only to policies below certain financial limits (eg, $500 000 of death cover). Methods: We surveyed Australian health professionals (HPs) who discuss genetic testing with patients, to assess knowledge of the moratorium; reported patient experiences since its commencement; and HP views regarding regulation of genetic discrimination (GD) in Australia. Results: Between April and June 2020, 166 eligible HPs responded to the online survey. Of these, 86% were aware of the moratorium, but <50% had attended related training/information sessions. Only 16% answered all knowledge questions correctly, yet 69% believed they had sufficient knowledge to advise patients. Genetics HPs' awareness and knowledge were better than non-genetics HPs' (p<0.05). There was some reported decrease in patients delaying/declining testing after the moratorium's introduction, however, 42% of HPs disagreed that patients were more willing to have testing post-moratorium. Although many (76%) felt the moratorium resolved some GD concerns, most (88%) still have concerns, primarily around self-regulation, financial limits and the moratorium's temporary nature. Almost half (49%) of HPs reported being dissatisfied with the moratorium as a solution to GD. The majority (95%) felt government oversight is required, and 93% felt specific Australian legislation regarding GD is required. Conclusion: While the current Australian moratorium is considered a step forward, most HPs believe it falls short of an adequate long-term regulatory solution to GD in life insurance. Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared. (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu