Relative Hedging of Systematic Mortality Risk

A number of problematic issues have arisen in anticipation of the potential role of molecular tests for genetic predispositions to illness in risk assessment by insurance underwriters. We argue in this paper that the regrettable history and current risks of genetic discrimination warrant a presumption that genetic predisposition status should not be used in any nonmedical contexts, unless compelling evidence can demonstrate that serious harm will result to third-party interests without such use. We argue that insurers should not be able to initiate testing for genetic predisposition. We also argue that there are many reasons to doubt whether patients’ test results will result in such serious adverse selection as to cause substantial harm to insurance markets, except possibly at higher policy amounts in life or disability income insurance. We conclude that the burden of proof must be on insurers to demonstrate necessity of use in specific cases in which test availability shows high probability of imminent, serious harm to insurance markets.