I Also Assure Students of the Voluntary
Those who fail to comply will be fined $100 per month. Sure of their good intentions, university officials are blind to the ethical ramifications of an employer forcing employees to hand over extremely private information to the world's largest medical website.
Still worse, administrators seem astonished by the outrage of employees, who recognize the need to control cost, but can't understand why doing so necessitates disclosing their intimate medical secrets.
To fully appreciate the personal nature of this mandatory WebMD survey, consider the wide range of questions included in the medical history, and ask yourself how you would feel if your employer forced you to register this information online. Page 1 of the questionnaire asks standard medical questions: height, weight, blood pressure, and cholesterol. Then things get really personal.
The second page asked about illnesses like, arthritis, cancer, depression, colon polyps, and migraines. The third page examines medical procedures including colonoscopy, digital rectal exam, and prostate screenings. The fourth page queries diet, tobacco use, drinking and my favorite €How many times in the last 6 months did you drive when you had too much to drink?€ On page five, employees are asked about using illegal narcotics. Another page inquires about feelings of hopelessness, persistent sadness, or anxiety.
Finally, WebMD probes employee's personal lives asking about troubles with family, friends, or coworkers, including a death in the family, divorce, financial problems, or violence.
Unlike a discussion with my trusted physician, where I can wave-off questions that may be too personal, the WebMD survey is designed such that employees are not permitted to decline any of these questions.
A refusal to answer a question about a €stool blood test€ will prevent them from continuing onto the next page. Consequently, employees who don't' complete the survey will have $100 deducted from their paychecks each month.
Administrators assure employees that this information is kept strictly confidential. Yet, notwithstanding their good intentions, secret information is compromised every day. Even the National Security Agency (NSA), had a huge data breach when a rogue employee, Edward Snowden, stole a vast number of classified documents.
Beyond grad-theft, occasionally individual accounts are compromised. Employee profiles can be breached with a login ID and an email password. In dismissing the risk, administrators give every indication that they don't take these concerns seriously.
However, the real folly in Penn State's new wellness policy is that its implementation depends upon outright coercion. Rather than let employees voluntarily take part in the WebMD survey, the university requires compliance. This practice is an affront to the ethical standards set by Penn State's own Institutional Review Board (IRB), which was created to insure that studies aren't administered to respondents under duress.
As a professor, I sometimes ask students to fill out surveys for my research. The IRB not only requires that I clear the materials with their office in advance, but that I also assure students of the voluntary nature of the study.
Imagine how the university would respond if I compelled unwilling students to take my surveys by docking them one letter grade on each of their assignments, until they agreed to participate in my study.
Still worse, administrators seem astonished by the outrage of employees, who recognize the need to control cost, but can't understand why doing so necessitates disclosing their intimate medical secrets.
To fully appreciate the personal nature of this mandatory WebMD survey, consider the wide range of questions included in the medical history, and ask yourself how you would feel if your employer forced you to register this information online. Page 1 of the questionnaire asks standard medical questions: height, weight, blood pressure, and cholesterol. Then things get really personal.
The second page asked about illnesses like, arthritis, cancer, depression, colon polyps, and migraines. The third page examines medical procedures including colonoscopy, digital rectal exam, and prostate screenings. The fourth page queries diet, tobacco use, drinking and my favorite €How many times in the last 6 months did you drive when you had too much to drink?€ On page five, employees are asked about using illegal narcotics. Another page inquires about feelings of hopelessness, persistent sadness, or anxiety.
Finally, WebMD probes employee's personal lives asking about troubles with family, friends, or coworkers, including a death in the family, divorce, financial problems, or violence.
Unlike a discussion with my trusted physician, where I can wave-off questions that may be too personal, the WebMD survey is designed such that employees are not permitted to decline any of these questions.
A refusal to answer a question about a €stool blood test€ will prevent them from continuing onto the next page. Consequently, employees who don't' complete the survey will have $100 deducted from their paychecks each month.
Administrators assure employees that this information is kept strictly confidential. Yet, notwithstanding their good intentions, secret information is compromised every day. Even the National Security Agency (NSA), had a huge data breach when a rogue employee, Edward Snowden, stole a vast number of classified documents.
Beyond grad-theft, occasionally individual accounts are compromised. Employee profiles can be breached with a login ID and an email password. In dismissing the risk, administrators give every indication that they don't take these concerns seriously.
However, the real folly in Penn State's new wellness policy is that its implementation depends upon outright coercion. Rather than let employees voluntarily take part in the WebMD survey, the university requires compliance. This practice is an affront to the ethical standards set by Penn State's own Institutional Review Board (IRB), which was created to insure that studies aren't administered to respondents under duress.
As a professor, I sometimes ask students to fill out surveys for my research. The IRB not only requires that I clear the materials with their office in advance, but that I also assure students of the voluntary nature of the study.
Imagine how the university would respond if I compelled unwilling students to take my surveys by docking them one letter grade on each of their assignments, until they agreed to participate in my study.
Source...