Two years ago, as part of their "wellness initiative," the Cleveland Clinic stopped hiring smokers. When the Clinic's CEO, Delos M. Cosgrove, was asked about the program for an article in last weekend's New York Times Magazine, he said that if it were up to him, he would also stop hiring obese people as well.
Clearly, lifestyle decisions lead to huge medical and financial costs to both the hospital and the country. The logic, according to Mr. Cosgrove and others who justify not hiring smokers and people who are obese, is that punitive sanctions will coerce smokers and overweight folks to live healthier lives. Not hiring them or charging them more money for insurance, according to their logic, would effectively persuade people to change harmful health practices.
These arguments and rationale were explored in the August 16th New York Times Magazine piece "Fat Tax." Since public health campaigns have been successful in reducing smoking, the article asks, shouldn't we use similar tactics to rein in obesity?
A few years ago, the Drug Policy Alliance anticipated that arguments used against smokers today could be used against overweight people tomorrow. We spoke out against a Michigan heath care company that fired four employees for refusing to take a test to determine whether they smoked cigarettes. The company, Weyco Inc., adopted a policy that allowed them to fire employees who smoke, even if the smoking happens after business hours or at home. The company justified the firings because smokers were costing their company more money for health insurance.
At the time, the Drug Policy Alliance created a flash animation that asked viewers to vote on whether the company should be allowed to fire employees who smoke. The flash animation laid out compelling arguments for both sides, explaining that smoking results in 400,000 premature deaths each year. But it also pointed out that smoking is not the only activity that increases health risks and costs. Smokers may be the target today, but who will be next? People who are overweight? People who ride motorcycles? Most importantly, the animation raised a powerful question: should people's private lives be subject to oversight by their employers?
Like most people, I support campaigns to reduce smoking and obesity. I believe in public education campaigns and policies that offer help to people who are trying to quit smoking or unhealthy eating. Positive incentives like gym membership reimbursements, or cessation aids like the smoking patch or Nicorette gum, can be valuable aids to those who struggle with addiction. But by firing workers for smoking or being overweight -- and penalizing them when it comes to their health care -- we will be demonizing and marginalizing those to whom we should be reaching out.
They fired the smokers first. Now they are talking about not hiring obese people. Your personal struggle or lifestyle choice may be next!
Tony Newman is the director of media relations at the Drug Policy Alliance.
Follow Tony Newman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TonyNewmanDPA
Loading comments… 
Freedom!
Being so bright, you most definitely understand freedom more than most. So, great scholar mirandawil
I can understand medical institutio
What has become of this nation?
I personally never had a problem with health insurance. People fudge their stats for insurance all the time. "How much do you weigh?" "Do you smoke?" I don't know if insurance stats reflect the obesity rate in America.
But that shouldn't keep someone from being employed, esp if they're a good employee. I also worked with people who did drugs on the job. The reason why i don't mind smoking is because cigs won't lower your inhibition
I'm in California
Too late for you now, but sheesh.
Like my mama always said, just because someone asks you a question, doesn't mean you owe them an answer.
I wonder why it is that our medical insurance has to be connected to our work. Why should it be up to my employer if I can get insurance or not. I'd rather that my ability to earn a living is not connected to anything medical, perceived or otherwise.
No - but it IS okay to fire people who smoke obese people!
Slaves don't get paid.
So it might be another way of saying "slave" but it's not a very accurate one.
I don't see anyone complainin
So I come down in the middle. I have a problem with employers trying to retroactiv
Otherwise, we need to make it illegal for ALL employers to participat
Reductio ad absurdum.
This would help create jobs as prison guards for normally-w
Smoking?
Obesity?
STDs?
Abortions?
AIDS (as a result of lifestyle choice)
Injuries sustained while committing a crime?
Auto accidents for those judged to be in the wrong?
Drug abuse?