Almost one-quarter of those who are optimistic said they believe they and their families will live longer, healthier lives. On the flip side, there are certain diseases that everyone would agree should be eradicated, if possible. The disabled community thinks they may be further marginalized, if everything but a narrow norm is engineered out of existence. About seven in 10 of those surveyed by The Times believe a child's environment has the most significant effect on his or her future. This group might find their views challenged, experts say, if genetics is accepted as the basis for behavior and personality traits.
Genetic reductionism distills everything to one cause and one possible outcome.
It doesn't allow for a nuanced understanding of all the other factors that might influence whether you do or do not manifest a disease or become a criminal or look beautiful or exhibit great intelligence. While nature versus nurture debates may thrive in academia, and eventually affect public policy, genetic testing could represent the most direct threat to families if insurance companies and employers abuse information. A majority of those polled by The Times said they would be very likely or somewhat likely to take a genetic test to learn if they were at risk for disease. We desperately need a federal privacy law. It would be prudent to extend the Americans with Disabilities Act to include genetics, and we should insist that no one be allowed to be tested without their voluntary, informed consent.