Actually, you seem to be the only one who understands the issue at hand. Whos name is associated with a sample is really quite irrelevant. “Privacy” and higher insurance payments are pretty low on the scale of whats going on here. Its about ownership and patenting of DNA.
Thats also whats behind the debate between fetal stem cell research vs adult stem cell research.
If you own your DNA, then you could in the near future order yourself a new liver and get one for, lets say, $50,000. If I own the patent on your DNA, your new liver costs $500,000. If something about your DNA turns out to be a valuable therapy in the near future you could give the rights to replicate it free and cure the world of some affliction, if I own your DNA, you will get nothing and I will cure the world...at $50,000 each.
“If something about your DNA turns out to be a valuable therapy in the near future you could give the rights to replicate it free and cure the world of some affliction, if I own your DNA, you will get nothing and I will cure the world...at $50,000 each.”
Then go ahead and do it with your DNA. Don’t give it to anyone. You use it and save the world.
Your scenario is actually quite Marxist and communist.
The parents, something the founders put in the constitution to protect intellectual property derived from hard work, are not to the DNA, but to methods and uses.
And the person getting a DNA analysis does not give their DNA. They give some spit. DNA is only one component of a huge huge amount of chemicals.
Patent your spit.