The introduction of whole genome sequencing may have ethical implications. On one hand, genetic testing can potentially diagnose preventable diseases, both in the individual undergoing genetic testing and in their relatives. On the other hand, genetic testing has potential downsides such as genetic discrimination, loss of anonymity, and psychological impacts such as discovery of non-paternity.
Some ethicists insist that the privacy of individuals undergoing genetic testing must be protected, and is of particular concern when minors undergo genetic testing. Illuminas CEO, Jay Flatley, claimed in February 2009 that "by 2019 it will have become routine to map infants genes when they are born". This potential use of genome sequencing is highly controversial, as it runs counter to established ethical norms for predictive genetic testing of asymptomatic minors that have been well established in the fields of medical genetics and genetic counseling. The traditional guidelines for genetic testing have been developed over the course of several decades since it first became possible to test for genetic markers associated with disease, prior to the advent of cost-effective, comprehensive genetic screening.
When an individual undergoes whole genome sequencing, they reveal information about not only their own DNA sequences, but also about probable DNA sequences of their close genetic relatives. This information can further reveal useful predictive information about relatives' present and future health risks. Hence, there are important questions about what obligations, if any, are owed to the family members of the individuals who are undergoing genetic testing. In Western/European society, tested individuals are usually encouraged to share important information on any genetic diagnoses with their close relatives, since the importance of the genetic diagnosis for offspring and other close relatives is usually one of the reasons for seeking a genetic testing in the first place. Nevertheless, a major ethical dilemma can develop when the patients refuse to share information on a diagnosis that is made for serious genetic disorder that is highly preventable and where there is a high risk to relatives carrying the same disease mutation. Under such circumstances, the clinician may suspect that the relatives would rather know of the diagnosis and hence the clinician can face a conflict of interest with respect to patient-doctor confidentiality.
Privacy concerns can also arise when whole genome sequencing is used in scientific research studies. Researchers often need to put information on patient's genotypes and phenotypes into public scientific databases, such as locus specific databases. Although only anonymous patient data are submitted to locus specific databases, patients might still be identifiable by their relatives in the case of finding a rare disease or a rare missense mutation. Public discussion around the introduction of advanced forensic techniques (such as advanced familial searching using public DNA ancestry websites and DNA phenotyping approaches) has been limited, disjointed, and unfocused. As forensic genetics and medical genetics converge toward genome sequencing, issues surrounding genetic data become increasingly connected, and additional legal protections may need to be established.