Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In many cases, you see this kind of thinking at work in all sorts of issues. There are those who can't see slippery slopes until they end up face down in the mud and then wonder how things go so messed up. Few significant privacy issues start out as large scale problems degrading privacy. Mostly, they start out small, you know, something to "help" everyone and reduce costs and so on. Later, when the lines are crossed it is already to late because a new system has become ingrained in government and/or society and rolling it back it nearly impossible.
Take the seemingly innocuous wellness exam that appear not very invasive. It might be a simple screening for cholesterol r something like that. No big deal. Hey the employer has a vested interest in helping to make sure its employees are health and maybe even participate in offering some solutions to reduce the problem. After all, there is money involved, which is the real reason, not some caring about other people but ok, no big deal.
The next step is a test of sorts. A company includes many other things in a wellness exam or screening and gets hammered for it. They don't get fined for example, for everything they did, just some of things. So next time those things aren't done but still more is being done in the screening than before. Next year comes another push and just one small test is included that wasn't before, you know, because the company cares and they have a vested interest is keeping costs for insurance low. Never mind that the insurance rates go up anyway, that is always besides the point. Never mind that perhaps the operations of the company contribute to some of the wellness problems, that too is besides the point. The point of course, is to reduce the financial burden on the insurance company while increasing the financial burden of the person paying the premiums. This is all done under the guise of "we're here to help you".
If all of this was about helping people, the health care problems in this country should have ceased to exist long ago. I mean, since every time you look around there is another process or procedure, another screening as small as it might be and so much concern about the wellness of people, how is it possible any problems with health care service delivery exists? It should be next to impossible.
My employer offers an incentive to take the annual wellness exam. It's not mandatory nor are there repercussions if you don't participate. At the end of the exam they give your blood pressure, cholesterol, bmi (body mass index) and a few other readings with some tips on how to become more healthy. That being said, highly doubtful these exams are being used as a screen for companies to check for "pre-existing conditions, as well as general indications of illness or poor health)" as the OP states. In fact the article is more around an employee not taking the exam vs a company using data from an examination. In any event, if a company were to have access and use the info you can bet that if it was ever linked back that company would be subjected to numerous lawsuits, penalties, fines, etc that the reward would be far less than the risk.
Undercover B, companies are on various gradients from intrusive to non-intrusive(like what your company seems like)......
The concern is on the companies that have coercions on various levels....
Also, it is a privacy issue, regards what an employee can demand you give up of your person, to a third-party or not, regardless of how it IS used.....
BTW, you have no absolute certainty, ever, that that info is NOT being abused, or possibly used against you. Just the possibility that it can be abused/used against you, and that you have no control over the same, gives every reason to avoid any biometric/wellness test.
You say highly-doubtful that info can/will be abused, but you have no certainty or control over the same.
All you can do is have faith it will not be. That's not good enough. Who is to say someone could not steal or hack your personal health info as well, same as financial info?
Again, no entity, public or private, should have a right to all of your personal vitals, regardless of carrots/sticks/coercion/appearance or lack of it...
I really feel for all of you in this generation, this is something that I would never have even thought of. I never dreamed life/society would be what it is now back when I was growing up and as a young adult. This is absurd. I still have a problem with nosiness/credit checks for employment, insurance purposes, new utilities accounts, and whatever else a credit check is done for except extending credit. I am so blessed that I do not have to go through what you all are having to go through in your work lives. I also have a big problem with those pre-employment personality exams. I did not take one (just didn't do it) when I applied for a retail position at holiday time 2 years ago, and still got the job.
I too am a Michigan Transplant, and about to retire & I too ache for my kids generation. I work in healthcare, so of course I have to comply with this and I see it getting more invasive with each passing year. This year instead of the usual intradermal TB test they had to draw THREE tubes of blood, Really? Three? to test for TB? Hmmm....
I imagine that soon, we in health care will be required to wear a "fit-bit" type item 24/7 for "patient safety," because if we hadn't had enough sleep, good food, low blood sugar, etc we could endange patients. How far might this go. It has already gone farther than I'd have ever imagined it would.
Even with credit checks, I think we have gone too far. If I'm applying for a mortgage, well of course, but I went in to buy a used car and pay cash & they required a credit check??? A used car salesman checking my credit?? Why? Seems too invasive!
That is for "your safety", but actually has been used as an ideal pretext for pulling over a car, as a pure trojan horse....
Has nothing to do with adult safety. They are a revenue generator as well, but, again, in actuality a trojan horse excuse to pull you over, and possibly search your vehicle as well.......
That was also something that was for "our good", but just created more surveillance under the guise of a safety law....
The "Nanny State" regulations like these are simply an excuse for further meddling with what remains of our personal volitions, habits, desires, and most of all, freedoms...
We have such a thing as free-will.....the current victims ethology in vogue is another thing that goes against this.....you cannot legislate morality. We remain free, I presume, to make our own decisions as to our lifestyles, without mandates..
If all of this was about helping people, the health care problems in this country should have ceased to exist long ago. I mean, since every time you look around there is another process or procedure, another screening as small as it might be and so much concern about the wellness of people, how is it possible any problems with health care service delivery exists? It should be next to impossible.
If there was actual concern, all children in the US would be insured up to 18, and all costs of childbirth would be covered, at the very least.
Who is truly "caring" about who? No one.....It is all a matter of cost control, hidden under the rubric of "caring"......
If there was actual concern, all children in the US would be insured up to 18, and all costs of childbirth would be covered, at the very least.
Who is truly "caring" about who? No one.....It is all a matter of cost control, hidden under the rubric of "caring"......
This thinking frustrates me. If you're paying the cost of your health care, do what you want. If you want someone else to pay (company, taxpayer) then you should be expected to exercise preventative health care.
All policy and funding decisions are about cost control at some level as there is not an unlimited pot to pull from. Frankly to link this line of thinking to the OP as a taxpayer the last person I want to be responsible for is someone who has their head in the sand about their own health and objects to knowing whether they are ill or at risk of illness.
The question of "free" is attractive in the abstract, less so in reality. Why should a poor childless taxpayer support an affluent child's health care needs?
How many of the people here complaining are in shape and genuinely healthy?
Why should that even be a concern of yours? The entire question reeks of intrusion.
In shape according to what standard? Healthy according to what standard?
Do people that are out of shape according to some standard now lose their opportunity to complain?
This is exactly what I was talking about before. Someone else starts deciding although in a very quiet and seemingly innocent way that if you are out of shape or unhealthy suddenly your voice shouldn't be heard on a question of privacy.
It didn't take very long for that slippery slope to get more grease.
I thought so. If you are a fatty then you complain. Healthy folk who eat smart and exercise would welcome an thorough physical with full blood work and related testing. I do.
I'm sure healthy folks that eat smart and exercise would never have a genetic condition...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
