Long-term care, life, and disability insurers usage of genetic information for certain purposes prohibition provision
SF3989 would revise Minnesota insurance law to restrict how long-term care, life, and disability insurers may use genetic information when underwriting or pricing policies. The bill defines genetic information and genetic testing, then creates a new section prohibiting insurers from denying, canceling, limiting coverage, or setting different premium rates based solely in whole or in part on an individual’s or family member’s genetic information. It also bars insurers from requiring, requesting, encouraging, or coercing genetic testing, including complete genomic sequencing, as a condition of coverage, renewal, or pricing.
The bill allows limited use of existing medical information for underwriting if the insurer obtains prior written consent that is separate from other medical-record authorizations. It also permits insurers to consider a medical diagnosis in an individual’s record even if that diagnosis was based on a genetic test. The new protections would take effect August 1, 2026, and apply to policies offered, issued, or renewed on or after that date. The bill also repeals older statutory provisions that previously governed genetic testing by life insurers and fraternal benefit societies, replacing that narrower framework with broader restrictions on use of genetic information across the covered insurance lines.
SF3989 would amend Minnesota Statutes section 72A.139 and add a new section 72A.1391, expanding state insurance regulation to cover the use of genetic information by long-term care, life, and disability insurers. It would eliminate prior provisions that focused mainly on life insurers requiring genetic tests and instead impose broader anti-discrimination and consent rules on underwriting, pricing, and policy issuance or renewal. The bill would affect insurers, applicants, policyholders, and family members whose genetic information might otherwise be used in coverage decisions.
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a consumer-protection and privacy bill, with an emphasis on preventing genetic discrimination in insurance. There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal opposition or support is documented here. The overall posture of the bill suggests a protective, pro-consumer intent rather than a controversial policy change.
The main policy tension in the bill is between protecting individuals from genetic discrimination and preserving insurers’ ability to underwrite risk using medical information. The bill draws that line by banning adverse actions based on genetic information while still allowing insurers to use existing medical diagnoses, including diagnoses derived from genetic tests, if they obtain separate written consent to access the information. Another potential point of contention is the prohibition on requiring or pressuring applicants to undergo genetic testing, which limits insurer access to information some may argue is relevant to pricing and risk assessment.