Following the recommendations of a report by Monash University, Financial Services Minister Stephen Jones announced that the federal government would introduce a legislative ban on the use of genetic test results in life insurance underwriting.
The government launched a consultation on the issue of genetic discrimination in life insurance in November 2023 and received over 1,000 submissions, 97 per cent of which supported a total ban of the practice.
In a statement, the minister recognised the potential value of genetic testing, stating it can be a “life-saving step” in helping medical practitioners prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a range of heritable conditions, cancer predisposition syndromes, and cancers.
Jones said the change would “give Australians the confidence to undertake genetic testing without fear it will impact their ability to access financial security through life insurance”.
“I have met with countless people affected by this issue and thank them for sharing their stories and helping to drive this important change. The engagement from the community on this issue speaks to the importance of this announcement for so many Australians,” he said.
Council of Australian Life Insurers (CALI) chief executive Christine Cupitt said the life insurance industry supported the ban.
“The Council of Australian Life Insurers fully supports this announcement. It’s good for working Australians, it’s good for government and it’s good for industry, too,” Cupitt said.
“Australia’s life insurers have never wanted to do anything to discourage people from taking genetic tests and accessing the information they need to make informed choices about their health.”
Cupitt noted that, given the advancement of genetic testing technology and the ease at which it can now be accessed, “now is the time for strict government regulation”.
While there have been concerns about the use of this technology in relation to insurance, CALI stated that Australian life insurers “have never and would never require someone to take a genetic test for the purpose of underwriting”, and that any suggestion otherwise is “simply incorrect”.
Cupitt said: “Life insurers want to support Australians to manage their health in a preventative way and recognise that genetic testing plays an important part in empowering them to do so.”
The government’s announcement also drew support from the Australian Medical Association, with president Professor Steve Robson congratulating Jones and the government for addressing the issue.
“We know that the fear of being denied insurance coverage has been a huge disincentive for Australians to have genetic testing when they need it. Seeing this situation fixed is an enormous step forward for health care in this country,” Robson said.
“A situation where there’s been a huge financial penalty for having potentially life-saving medical testing has now been corrected.”
Monash University’s ethical, legal and social adviser, Dr Jane Tiller added: “This is outstanding news for patients and the Australian public, and will safeguard [the] future of genomic medicine, precision health and medical research.”
The ban will be subject to a five-yearly review, ensuring there are no unintended consequences of the legislation.
Most smart advisers would have advised their client to obtain trauma cover BEFORE even thinking about doing a genetic test.
I’ve lost count of the number of clients in my portfolio who have been diagnosed with mild symptoms and now hang on to their trauma cover (all of them on level premiums).
The insurers will have to raise premiums to cover the lopsided effect of those with genetic disorders rushing to buy trauma cover… in the end, all policy holders will have a nose-bleed.
The life insurers and legislators are in a lose-lose corner on this. In fact, everyone is in a the same corner, now.
“The ban will be subject to a five-yearly review, ensuring there are no unintended consequences of the legislation”. Lol. Governments specialise in unintended consequences.
While recognising the benefit of such a restriction how will insurers be protected against anti selection, Five years is too long a review period. In the UK there has long been a similar voluntary ban however it is subject to an annual review. This move could lead to a situation where global reinsurers consider Australia to risky a place to do business. This is morally right but economically foolhardy.
Oh good, the government is involved…
I needed that chuckle.