Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a Term Paper

Notions of genetic discrimination,genetic determinism,and a functional comparison - Term Paper ExamplePortrayals of scientific fact in the mainstream media are, to most scientists, for the most part inaccurate descriptions of legitimate research methods.One aspect of scientific research that the media commonly misrepresents is that related to genetic research. For instance, a study may be published associating on average a specific gene with a certain quantifiable behavior. The media, upon receiving word of this research, will assortment the wording of the story in order to sensationalize and sell the story as newsworthy, often relying on lyric poem like cause. Over time, the public has started to perceive genes as the causal determinants of our actions, our lives, and our decisions. This view, c anyed genetic determinism, delusions at the topic of many fears about the specter of genetic discrimination, which many believe is on the horizon for veritable countries where genome maps are becoming increasingly cheap. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether genetic discrimination will grow to construct the problem many are forecasting. From an ethical perspective, the problem of genetic discrimination may not lie solely in the act of discriminating against an individual based on his or her genome rather, the problem may lie in peoples fears about a genetic bias, which may cause few not to seek a diagnosis. Utilitarianism is the ethical theory that the moral content of an act (or rule) consists solely of the layer to which it maximizes happiness (or utility) in the greatest number of people. In other words, the good toward which all of our actions ought to pursue, under the utilitarian theory, is happiness, pleasure, or preference-satisfaction. Accordingly, if by ending the life of one person we save the life of twenty persons, thusly that act is not only allowable but also preferred under the utilitarian theory. Utilitarianism does fetch intuitive appeal i nsofar as any living being will seek to maximize its pleasure and minimize its pain. This moral theory acknowledges this fact and places happiness as the good toward which we evaluate all actions as either moral or immoral. The Utilitarian Argument against Discrimination Under a utilitarian framework, the argument against discrimination in any context follows from the assumption that society will be stop off, or enriched, by the contributions of as many people as possible. Thus, if people were to be take awayd against in around fashion, their contributions to society (and ideas on how to make society better) would be lost without an audience. Therefore, as the argument goes, it is wrong to discriminate against people without looking at their character or actions. Utilitarians believe that policies like affirmative action, which are aimed at producing an equal society, are good in that they produce the most happiness for the highest number of people, primarily for the causation g iven above. However, if this equality lowered the overall good of society, utilitarians would immediately change their mind with respect to the equality-building measures. Likewise, in the case of genetic discrimination, utilitarians usually adopt legislation and other measures to counter the effects of discriminatory practices nevertheless, if it were to be proven that equality-building attempts (such as banning mandatory genetic testing for new employees) hurt society, utilitarians would be induce to change their opinions with respect to that situation. The Nature of Genetic Discrimination Genetic discrimination relates to making decisions because of genetic breeding when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits, or any other term or given of employment (EEOC, 2010). Employers cannot utilize genetic informati