Quay lại ISE IV English (UK) – Interactive task

Genetic Screening and Insurance

Tiếng Anh kịch bản nói

Ethan

A clear British English speaker with a steady, encouraging style.

33 years · male

Practise talking about "Genetic Screening and Insurance" with Ethan, your AI speaking avatar. Speak out loud, get instant feedback, and build confidence for your ISE IV English – Interactive task speaking exam.

Start free AI practice

Cuộc hội thoại

I am going to give you a situation. Insurers want limited access to genetic screening results when pricing policies. You need to ask questions and then tell me what you think should happen. What do you need to know first?

Câu trả lời hay:

I would need to know where the power sits before giving a view. In this case, insurers want limited access to genetic screening results when pricing policies. I would ask who benefits immediately, who bears the risk if the judgement is wrong, and whether affected people can appeal or demand reasons. Without those answers, the proposal may sound efficient while concealing the risk of private insurance turning health knowledge into exclusion.

The main options are ban genetic data in insurance decisions or allow tightly limited use for high-value policies. What assumption behind these options would you challenge?

Câu trả lời hay:

I would challenge the assumption that ban genetic data in insurance decisions and allow tightly limited use for high-value policies are the only realistic moral choices. They may be useful starting points, but the real decision may require a narrower pilot, a stronger appeal route or a different definition of success. Otherwise we may choose between two polished versions of the same blind spot.

Suppose someone says your approach is too cautious and that urgent action is needed. How would you respond?

Câu trả lời hay:

I would accept the urgency, but separate urgency from certainty. I would allow action where the current harm is clear, but I would limit scale, publish reasons and set a review date. That responds to pressure without pretending the risk has disappeared, especially when the policy could lead to the risk of private insurance turning health knowledge into exclusion.

What long-term consequence worries you most if this decision is handled badly?

Câu trả lời hay:

The long-term risk that worries me most is institutional habit. Once organisations build procedures around a decision, reversing it becomes expensive, embarrassing and politically difficult. In genetic screening and insurance, the risk of private insurance turning health knowledge into exclusion could start to feel normal rather than exceptional, which is more damaging than a single poor decision.

Where should responsibility sit: individuals, institutions, markets or government?

Câu trả lời hay:

Responsibility should follow power, information and capacity. Government should set enforceable limits, institutions should explain and monitor decisions, and private actors should not profit from risks they do not carry. Individuals need voice, but voice is not a substitute for power or an appeal mechanism. For genetic screening and insurance, that qualification keeps the answer tied to the actual case.

After hearing the objections, what final position would you take?

Câu trả lời hay:

My final position would be conditional rather than absolute. I would not give a pure yes or no answer. I would allow the least irreversible action that addresses the immediate harm, but only with published reasons, independent review and a real route for people to challenge outcomes that affect them. For genetic screening and insurance, that qualification keeps the answer tied to the actual case.