What if they found an ‘accident-prone’ gene?
July 25, 2011 by Fred HosierPosted in: Employee responsibility, In this week's e-newsletter, Research on safety, Special Report, Transportation safety, What do you think?, Workers' attitudes about safety
PDF A researcher thinks he’s found three genes that are linked to being accident-prone. What could this mean for workplace safety?
Dr. Jin Huiqing has spent nearly three decades in China trying to figure out why some motorists are more accident prone than others.
Among his findings: 6 to 8% of Chinese motorists are accident prone, which he defines as having caused three or more crashes in five consecutive years.
Now, by testing DNA samples of 350 Chinese bus drivers, he’s found that three genes show potential links to accident-prone driving.
Jin’s work isn’t just on DNA. He tries to find the root cause of crashes by identifying the physical or psychological traits of poor drivers, such as risk-taking or poor response times.
Chinese municipalities hire him to improve road safety.
It’s needed in China: Up to 300 people are killed on the roads each day. Traffic crashes are the leading cause of death for Chinese aged 15 to 44.
Jin uses a three-pronged approach:
- a battery of tests to screen drivers
- training with driving simulators, and
- surveillance cameras to closely monitor roads for problems.
The city of Jinan uses his system. Police there say traffic deaths have fallen by a third in the past five years.
Bus and taxi drivers in Jinan are tested. Those whose results show they’re predisposed to crashes are informed of this and advised on corrective action.
Now, let’s get back to the possibility that Jin has found one or more genes linked to being accident-prone. Columbia University injury prevention specialist Guohua Li, who is familiar with Jin’s work, is a critic of using DNA in this manner.
Li says it would be unethical to shape policies on granting licenses to drive commercial vehicles based on a person’s genetic information.
Imagine that Jin’s research is proven correct — that there is an “accident-prone gene.” Do you think it would be ethical to use this information to weed out workers who would be more susceptible to injuries at work? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: accident prone, China, DNA, genes, vehicle crashes
Loading ...
July 26th, 2011 at 7:37 am
Have to agree with Li…I do consider Dr. Jin’s work a bit unethical-but interesting! Besides, what are you going to do, test every potential employee’s DNA to see if they’re accident prone??? Very discriminatory! People can be trained and drilled on safety every day of the week and it wouldn’t matter if they have accident prone genes or not-ACCIDENTS ARE GONNA HAPPEN! Too much is going on in today’s world that takes drivers’ attention away from their driving; such as phones, ipods, radios, computers, drugs, alcohol to name a few. Don’t know how it is elsewhere, but here it’s pure inattention that contributes to most work-place & vehicle accidents.
July 26th, 2011 at 8:01 am
Your questions invariably raise more questions. If this information proves correct and became a precise science, could employers start to access this information or require a pre-employment screening? If so, it is likely that those who have the accident prone gene might never be able to hold a job again. Then the real hair splitting starts - would this not be the equivalent of not hiring someone based on a physical or mental disability? Would accessing such information not violate HIPAA laws?
July 26th, 2011 at 8:42 am
Perhaps the ‘accident-prone’ gene is a subset of ADHD genes, if there are such genes.
July 26th, 2011 at 9:00 am
Does this not violate GINA laws?
July 26th, 2011 at 9:18 am
Obviously, we cannot pre-screen for genetic deficiencies any more than we can currently pre-screen for disposition toward other medical conditions. Our “frequent flier” program is focused more on recognizing individuals who have repeat accidents and proactively working with them to help identify what they can do. For example, if someone has multiple injuries related to paying attention, we can ask them to work with their personal doctor to identify whether any personal medical conditions are putting them at risk (ie, attention deficit disorder, diabetes, alzheimer’s, pernicious anemia, etc). Their personal medication condition is none of our business - but we can encourage them to ask their doctor to make sure they don’t have an untreated medical condition putting them at risk. If there were a similar genetic test that could identify higher risk employees, we could work with them on “reasonable accommodation” to provide tools and job assignments that may lower their risk for injury. I think the research is valuable - we’ll just need ethical application of the information once it is established.
July 26th, 2011 at 9:33 am
If they were using this method to determine if someone was employable, they aren’t only being discrimnatory…Aren’t they also creating another disability? Now would this person be considered disabled and draw their disability? Think this will cause more problems than help!
July 26th, 2011 at 9:48 am
Of course it SHOULD be ethical to weed these people out for the safety of the public especially if it can be PROVEN that hundreds of lives can be saved. However, what action is then taken depends or each individual country’s acceptance of what is fair.
In some countries such as China they may simply not be able to work in certain fields, in other countries they may be redirected into other fields more suited to their skills. In the United States I am sure this would fall under the category of a disability and as such fair and reasonable accomodation would have to be made to allow them to safely work.
In addition the culture of the U.S., where being able to drive is seen as a right not a privilidge, where public transportation is less available and efficient and where we have tight medical privacy laws, would make it nearly impossible to pass laws requiring checks for the gene. As an example of our attitude towards driving there is currently no system in place for renewed testing to ensure that elderly drivers continue to have safe driving skills, in addition I have seen stories of people who have had to take driving tests dozens if not over a hundred times to pass the driving test … and then they got their license. People would see any legislation as curtailing their freedom.
The science is too new to create laws to test for the gene as part of job screening at this point.
July 26th, 2011 at 10:08 am
Look at the positive side, if you know you can give an employee specific training or help them make career path choices better suited to there ability. Isn’t safety and job satisfaction what you should really want for an employee anyway? If I have the genes in question would I really want to be a pilot or a bomb quad member or would it be better for me, my family and those around me if I had a desk job.
July 26th, 2011 at 10:09 am
It would be highly unethical and prejudicial to base someone’s employment on genetic makeup. Most behaviors are learned and if a person does have this genetic code, they can still be taught how to act responsibly and avoid accidents. So the only benefit of this research could be to inform the individual so that they can take the necessary steps to improve behavior and avoid accidents.
July 26th, 2011 at 10:19 am
I would hope some research could be done on how to make genetically accident prone people behave in less accident prone ways. I have noted there do see to be certain employees who have more injuries. Perhaps addtional training or behavior modification programs could assist them in dealing with the genes they inherited. People also have genetic pre-dispositions to alcoholism and a host of other things, but genetics seldom tell the whole story when it comes to complicateds behaviors.
July 26th, 2011 at 11:26 am
How does this fit in with GINA (Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act)? I’m not an HR person, but my understanding of this new law is that it is illegal to ask or determine anything about someone’s family history or predisposition to any disease or condition. Seems to me that this would not only be unethical, but illegal.
July 26th, 2011 at 12:38 pm
I love it when the rules, regulations and policies that have been created cause conflict between themselves. It is discriminitory to use this to determine if someone should get a job, but the government also says that it is the employers responsibility to provide a safe workplace even to the point of finding issues that people do not even know exist yet. So they want it both ways or even all ways just so they can contiue to stick it to the masses.
I know we need more regulations to confuse everyone even more, yeah that’s it.
July 26th, 2011 at 12:49 pm
It’s a slippery slope. On one hand, my desire to make things safer tells me that this would be a great tool in accomplishing just that. However, ethics kick in and I have to question the fact that you would potentially be denying employment to someone based purely on something that they have zero control over. As others have stated, if the knowledge that someone is genetically predisposed to be accident-prone could be used to provide them with reasonable accommodation, then I’d be all for it.
July 26th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Gattaca anyone?
July 27th, 2011 at 9:29 am
I suspect that individuals classified as “accident prone” are very, very, very uncommon. Focusing on the “accident prone” individual is like having Mario Mendosa as your batting coach.