Considering the implications of DNA testing

Technology continues advancing at a quicker pace than ever. As we enter a new information age,… Technology continues advancing at a quicker pace than ever. As we enter a new information age, cheap DNA-testing systems may be developed. In the future, it will be possible to determine information about people before they are hired for jobs or even admitted to colleges. We must consider the ethics and consequences of this matter before jumping into allowing testing that harms an individual’s right to remain free.

Once allowed, DNA testing may be used in all aspects of life to determine one’s future predisposition to certain conditions and personality traits. DNA testing should be allowed in criminal cases, but unallowable by businesses, organizations and institutions on customers, employees or students. A recent event in the sports world has brought to light an issue that we are sure to confront within our lifetimes.

Near the end of last season, at just 22 years old, Eddy Curry, a 6-foot-11-inch 285-pound star center in the NBA, was entering his glory days. He was in the midst of helping lead the Chicago Bulls back to the playoffs for the first time since Michael Jordan last took them to a World Championship back in 1998.

Then, out of nowhere his season ended. Doctors determined he may have a condition known as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. This condition has been involved in the sudden deaths of otherwise completely healthy athletes in the past, most notably Reggie Lewis of the Boston Celtics. Some others who have the condition see no effects of it during their entire lives. The Bulls could not cope with the fact that his playing basketball for them could put his life in danger.

They couldn’t cope without him on the court either, and were ousted early in the playoffs. The Bulls had their hearts in the right place, and were concerned about the welfare of their young star more than their success on the court.

This off-season, the Bulls made a bold proclamation to Curry. Take this here DNA test and we will give you a contract. They were willing to offer him $400,000 a year for the next 50 years if he indeed did have a predisposition to the same disease that has caused other athletes to die.

Curry refused any sort of deal. Even if he tested positive, there was only a small chance he would be at risk for this condition. Curry is a basketball player who wants and lives to play basketball. Ultimately, it should have been his decision. The Bulls could have easily given him a waiver to sign to clear the organization from responsibility, provided something happened to Curry because of this condition.

Testing for certain activities should be allowed. For example, drug testing has become a good way to scan employees. After all, drugs are something that one puts into their bodies. DNA, on the other hand, generally can’t be altered and has little relation with one’s own choices.

We may have just seen the tip of an iceberg with DNA testing. DNA can tell us traits that some may not want others to know, and traits that may not even occur or become present in a person, even if they have a predisposition to it. From testing, we will know about a predisposition to disease, personality traits and other conditions that one may not wish to share or even find out about for themselves.

Just think of how insurance companies could use this kind of testing to their advantage. Have a predisposition to cancer? Insurance goes up tenfold. This is just one consequence of testing that can arise and become troubling to many.

As for Curry, my prayers are with this man who is around the same age as the average college student, yet has already had to question his own mortality. Next year, he will play basketball in the NBA for the New York Knicks. In New York, DNA testing by an employer is illegal and the Knicks have decided to take their chances. One can only hope that he remains in good health and does not suffer any dire consequences as a result of playing. Regardless, it is a risk that Curry has indicated he will take.

Politicians should follow New York’s lead on a national level. It is surprising that the masses have not already condemned this type of DNA testing. Testing by organizations, businesses and universities imposed on employees or customers should become illegal nationwide. Otherwise, the right to individual privacy is in danger of extinction.

Scott thinks we should start testing the DNA of incoming students, to weed out those bad ones. E-mail him at sdn2@pitt.edu.