“Propensity to disease” is a very broad term in the health law realm. Should “propensity to disease” be limited to those instances in which there exists a clear physical marker (chemical or biological) of an identified health problem potentially on the horizon, or is it also acceptable (legally justifiable) to include other indicators less concrete such as “family history” where there may be statistical evidence but no known physical marker identified at present? What significance should this label/category have?
Secondly, is it fundamentally fair to deny an individual a verdict of “good health” (legally speaking) specifically and ONLY because of a genetic predisposition to a particular disease? What impact on the individual and medical systems would this denial have?
Please include at least two sources.
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"