Review of the following:  ELAINE DRAPER, Risky BUSINESS: GENETIC TESTING AND EXCLUSIONARY PRACTICES IN THE HAZARDOUS WORKPLACE. (Cambridge University Press 1991) [315 pp.] Index of names and subjects, glossary, notes, references. LC 90-28112; ISBN 0-521-37027-2 (cloth $49.50); ISBN 0-42248-5 (paper $15.95). [40 W. 20th St., New York NY 10011.

Shrader-Frechette, Kristin S.

English

UNH Scholars' Repository

RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002)Volume 3Number 3 RISK: Issues in Health & Safety Article 11June 1992Book ReviewKristin S. Shrader-FrechetteFollow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/riskPart of the Biological Factors Commons, Labor and Employment Law Commons, OccupationalHealth and Industrial Hygiene Commons, and the Other Genetics and Genomics CommonsThis Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the University of New Hampshire – School of Law at University of New HampshireScholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002) by an authorized editor of University ofNew Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact ellen.phillips@law.unh.edu.Repository CitationKristin S. Shrader-Frechette, Book Review, 3 RISK 267 (1992).Book ReviewErratumThe citation for this review is 3 RISK 259 (1992) in most commercial databases.This book review is available in RISK: Health, Safety & Environment (1990-2002): https://scholars.unh.edu/risk/vol3/iss3/11Book Reviews 267ELAINE DRAPER, RISKY BUSINESS: GENETIC TESTING ANDEXCLUSIONARY PRACTICES IN THE HAZARDOUS WORK-PLACE. (Cambridge University Press 1991) [315 pp.] Index of names andsubjects, glossary, notes, references. LC 90-28112; ISBN 0-521-37027-2 (cloth$49.50); ISBN 0-42248-5 (paper $15.95). [40 W. 20th St., New York NY 10011.]There are at least two divergent accounts of the nature andconsequences of workplace exposure to hazardous substances.According to one view, the risks created by exposure to certainchemicals represent threats to everyone and, therefore, they ought to bereduced as much as possible. On this account, emission of certainchemicals is a social disease causing ubiquitous harm.According to a second view, workplace exposure to certainsubstances represents a threat only to particular persons. Hence, inorder to protect them, susceptible individuals ought to be removed fromoccupations involving such exposures. On this second view, exposureto chemicals is not generally harmful, since only hypersensitiveindividuals are affected.Proponents of the first view tend to blame industry for generalchemical hazards to workers and the public. Proponents of the secondview, however, tend to blame susceptible workers, particularindividuals who are the most obvious victims of chemical exposures.The main purpose of RISKY BUSINESS is to argue against the secondview and therefore against the practice of genetic screening to determineworker susceptibility. Instead, sociologist Elaine Draper argues forstricter health standards for chemical exposures. Like canaries used bycoal miners for early detection of methane, Draper claims that geneticallysusceptible members of high-risk groups also provide warning signalsfor conditions likely to be dangerous for all workers. If employers reactto the warnings by removing the canaries, the high-risk workers,instead of reducing hazardous workplace exposures, Draper argues thatdeadly consequences will follow for everyone. Less susceptibleworkers will lose their signals that warned of danger, and exposuresand health hazards will increase, ultimately harming even more persons.3 RISK - Issues in Health & Safety 259 [Summer 1992]Using case studies of two large chemical companies, Dow andDuPont, Draper chronicles how contemporary industries are removingthe canaries, the high-risk workers. They also deliberately fail to informmore susceptible employees of possible hazards, deny the risksinvolved and therefore accelerate the threat to other workers. Moreimportantly, Draper reveals how industry paints a deadly,occupationally induced hazard as a problem of unique, individualsusceptibility. Using 120 interviews, as well as documentary materialsand workplace observations, Draper provides an account that is sure tobecome a classic in the risk literature.RISKY BUSINESS includes seven chapters as well as 100 pages ofreferences and notes. The first chapter outlines the emergence of genetictesting and susceptibility explanations, surveying the conflict betweenlabor and management over how to define workers at risk fromhazardous chemicals. 1 Chapter 2 explains the way that industry oftendefines and debates workplace risk, in terms of specific, geneticpropensities of individuals, rather than as a societal threat to virtuallyeveryone. In other words, industry typically deals with workplace riskby "blaming the victim"2 and by projecting social ills onto individuals 3whom industry then defines as unusual or atypical. 4 Chapter 3 showshow managers and scientists who accept the individual-susceptibilityapproach make it appear that all workers and exposure conditions notconsidered "high risk" are safe.5 In Chapter 4, Draper analyzes thestratification of the work force. She argues that, contrary to itsproponents, the new genetic screening technology is neither ethicallynor politically neutral. Instead the process often singles out women andminorities. 6 Hence, she argues, the search for workers most at riskoften results in the identification of inappropriate biological categories.1 At 18.2 At 37.3 At 39.4 At 44, 49.5 At 59.6 At 75-83.Book Reviews 269Chapter 5 surveys the use of genetic susceptibility tests, showingthat the results are typically denied to workers, even after they ask,7 andthat the tests are rarely used to monitor and improve worker health.Instead, the chapter argues that the results are used largely to "removethe canary" and to deny that any health threat exists. Such denial ispossible, Draper argues, because workers in dangerous industriestypically are not unionized. 8 Chapter 6 uncovers the legal and regulatoryenvironment that is conducive to removing particular employees, ratherthan to reducing workplace exposures to hazardous substances. Such anenvironment encourages initial screening, not continual surveillance -and secrecy, not honesty, about hazards.9 Hence, Draper argues thatthere is virtually no sense in which genetic screening has helpedworkers in any way. In Chapter 7, Draper summarizes the argumentsand suggests the policy implications of her findings. With the rapidgrowth of genetic knowledge and the increasing influence of economic,legal and regulatory factors, Draper predicts that exclusionary testingwill become even more prevalent in the future.Draper's book deserves high praise, not only because of the wealthof information about chemical risks, genetics, occupational medicineand corporate policies and politics that it includes, but also because ofher compelling sociological thesis. This thesis is that industryassimilates scientific and technological developments - like genetictesting - in ways that both reflect and serve its social biases and powerrelationships. Because her volume attempts to tell a story of causes andmotives, and not merely actions and consequences, Draper is likely tobe both praised for her insights but attacked by those who areuncomfortable with her case-study methodology. The complexinferences associated with the sociology of risk are typically notamenable to the precise and quantitative techniques of hypothesisdeduction often used in other sciences. Because they are not, someresearchers may argue that Draper should have done more to build her7 At 100.8 At 114.9 At 157.3 RISK - Issues in Health & Safety 259 [Summer 1992]case with a variety of statistical methods and tests.In response, however, Draper's defenders should point out that, inorder to deal with some of issues she confronts, Draper could have usedonly informal methods such as interviews, observations and analysis ofdocuments. Also, one book cannot do everything, and Draper's volumeis meant to achieve sociological analysis, not statistical proof. In layinga plausible sociological foundation for a compellingly correct thesis,Draper accomplishes more than most authors. She shows us howindustry apparently uses advances in science and technology to serve itsown economic ends and social biases.In laying a sociological foundation for future work on occupationalrisks and genetic screening, Draper has achieved a number of goals thatmake her work unique and particularly noteworthy. For one thing, thetype of sociological analysis that she uses has never before been broughtto bear on the question of exclusionary testing of workers in thechemical industry. Second, Draper consistently employs a detailed,analytic treatment of alternative positions on particular issues related togenetic testing in the workplace. She carefully exposes the assumptionsand traces the consequences of opposing arguments, revealing logicaland social analysis at its best. Third, Draper does a superb job ofshowing how the shift from emphasis on chemical hazards to emphasison individual susceptibility is neither a scientific breakthrough nor anobjective analysis of recent consequences of genetic developments.Rather, she reveals that the shift is a socially constructed accountdesigned to serve special interests. Fourth, Draper serves policymakerswell by outlining specific alternatives to exclusionary genetic testing inthe workplace. For all these reasons, her volume is a landmarkdiscussion of the sociological study of workplace risk.Kristin S. Shrader-Frechette tt See previous review.

Book Review

https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1099&context=risk

Book Review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UNH Scholars' Repository