Genetic Testing: Promise and Peril
Ottawa, Ontario, May 5, 2003

Is the current legal regulation of genetic testing adequate?

"I don't have confidence in the current regulatory environment," says Timothy Caulfield. "It's no-one's fault. It's not Health Canada's fault or the Canadian government's fault. These technologies are now just coming out. But we do need to respond and create a regulatory framework. One of the things I'm very concerned about is that we don't have any regulatory framework for the marketing of genetic technologies, and I think we need that."

Bill C-13, a legal framework for reproductive technologies, is currently in third reading in Parliament. If passed, the legislation will ban the use of genetic testing to determine the sex of a fetus, except when medically necessary. It will also make it a criminal offence for researchers to use embryonic stem cells for so-called regenerative medicine, such as the creation of a cloned kidney.

"I personally think that's a mistake. And if you believe the research that's been done in Canada, Canadians think it's a mistake to ban the technology," says Caulfield.

He notes that genetic testing touches a broad range of legal and ethical issues, including the nature of patient consent. This consent has traditionally been individually based. But most genetic tests reveal family traits. So how do we protect the rights of others affected by one person's genetic testing?

Given the broad social concerns over genetic testing, Abby Lippman says that any regulatory body should consist of a majority of non-expert citizens.

"The attitudes that people have towards genetically modified plants are quite different from attitudes to the potential for the genetic modification of people," says Lippman. "So, I wish I was a tomato because then people would have a little bit more concern about how you're going to change me when you start tinkering around with my DNA."