Privacy-friendly analytics help us see which jobs people explore. They stay off unless you agree.Analytics off unless you agree. Details

Read the record
Back to the river
Skip to sources
Time Machine

Genetic counselors

Also called GC, CGC, Certified genetic counselor, Oncology genetic counselor, Prenatal genetic counselor

In brief

In May 2025, BLS counted 3,740 US genetic counselors, with median pay of $100,040 a year. Of the BLS counts since 2012, the May 2025 count is the highest. The earliest figure here is an estimate of 200 from 1975, not measured the same way as today's count. The last full technology era for genetic counselors: Next-generation sequencing, 2012 to 2019. The NGS transition was the single largest driver of the genetic counseling workforce shortage that persists as of 2025.

What the sources say

Official outlook

BLS projects employment to grow 10.4% from 2025 to 2035.

BLS Employment Projections 2025-35

AI exposure studies

Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35. BLS publishes these counts as yearly survey snapshots and cautions against reading them as a precise trend. In May 2021 BLS changed how it estimates these counts (a model-based method using three years of survey data) and moved fully to the 2018 occupation codes, so part of a change across 2021 can come from the method rather than the work.

Last updated .

Cite this page
APA

Future History. (2026, October 11). Genetic counselors: jobs and pay since 1975 [Data set; data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35]. https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/29-9092

Chicago

Future History. "Genetic counselors: jobs and pay since 1975." Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35. Last modified October 11, 2026. https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/29-9092.

BibTeX

@misc{futurehistory_29_9092, author = {{Future History}}, title = {Genetic counselors: jobs and pay since 1975}, year = {2026}, month = oct, howpublished = {\url{https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/29-9092}}, note = {Last updated 2026-10-11. Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35}, }

The access date is today's date on your device.

drag to travel through time
195019752000now
2026
Known then as Genetic Counselor (university-based, non-credentialed; clinical genetics advisor)
Known then as Genetic Associate / Genetic Counselor (first master's-trained graduates, pre-NSGC)
Known then as Genetic Counselor (NSGC member, pre-ABGC certification)
Known then as Genetic Counselors (ABGC-certified CGC; BLS SOC 29-9092 introduced 2010)
Known today as Genetic Counselors (ABGC-certified CGC; BLS SOC 29-9092 introduced 2010)
Projected to still be called Genetic Counselors (ABGC-certified CGC; BLS SOC 29-9092 introduced 2010)
Data from the May 2025 survey
US Employment
4K
Est.

Stated in source: BLS OEWS

Official statistic
Report an error
Median Annual Wage
$100,040
Est.

≈ $97,475 in 2024 prices (derived by us, CPI-adjusted)

Official statistic
Report an error
Beat · 1947

Sheldon Clark Reed coins the term "genetic counseling" while leading the Dight Institute for Human Genetics at the University of Minnesota. He deliberately avoids the vocabulary of eugenics to signal a patient-centered, non-judgmental approach to counseling. His 1955 book "Counseling in Medical Genetics" becomes the founding text of the profession.

Beat · 1959

Jerome Lejeune and colleagues identify trisomy 21 as the chromosomal basis of Down syndrome, providing the first direct cytogenetic diagnosis of a common developmental condition. This discovery opens the era of prenatal chromosomal counseling and demonstrates that genetic counseling can offer families a definitive laboratory-confirmed diagnosis rather than probability estimates alone.

Beat · 1969

Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, New York, opens the first master's-level training program specifically designed to produce genetic counselors as a distinct healthcare occupation. The program, launched by Joan Marks and colleagues, combines human genetics science with psychological training and clinical communication skills. Before 1969 there was no pathway to become a genetic counselor other than completing a PhD in human genetics and transitioning informally into patient work.

Beat · 1979

The National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) is founded and incorporated, with Audrey Heimler as its first president. The NSGC provides the first professional home for genetic counselors and begins collecting salary and workforce data through its Professional Status Survey. Founding membership is concentrated in prenatal genetics settings; as of 2025, NSGC membership exceeds 3,600 and represents all subspecialties.

Beat · 1993

The American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC) administers its first board certification examination for genetic counselors, creating the Certified Genetic Counselor (CGC) credential. Prior to ABGC certification, there was no formal credential for genetic counselors beyond their master's degree. As of 2025, ABGC has certified more than 5,900 CGCs in the United States and Canada, and CGC certification is required for employment at most health systems and academic medical centers.

Beat · 1996

Myriad Genetics launches commercial BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing, creating the first mass-market hereditary cancer genetic test. This is the largest single demand catalyst in genetic counseling history to that point: for the first time, large numbers of women with family histories of breast or ovarian cancer can access a specific molecular test, and every positive result requires a counseling session to discuss 70% lifetime breast cancer risk, risk-management options including prophylactic surgery, and cascade testing for relatives. Hereditary cancer genetic counseling transforms from a niche subspecialty into a standard service at major cancer centers.

Beat · 2003

The Human Genome Project is declared complete on April 14, 2003, two years ahead of schedule. The reference sequence becomes the foundation for every subsequent molecular diagnostic test in clinical genetics. The completion marks the transition from the genomics-as-research era to genomics-as-clinical-medicine, setting up the next decade of rapid expansion in clinical genetic testing and genetic counseling demand.

Beat · 2013

ACMG issues guidelines on returning incidental (secondary) findings from clinical whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing, identifying 56 genes in which pathogenic variants should be reported regardless of the indication for testing. The guidelines create an immediate new counseling obligation for every WES/WGS case: pre-test consent must cover the possibility of learning about hereditary conditions unrelated to the test order, a disclosure with significant psychological implications requiring dedicated counseling time.

Beat · 2025

NSGC publishes its "AI in Genetic Counseling" Position Statement, establishing that genetic counselors bear professional responsibility for reviewing and validating AI-generated variant classifications before communicating them to patients. The statement confirms that AI tools must not replace the GC's clinical judgment, psychosocial assessment, or informed consent obligation. Separately, the NSGC 2025 Workforce Survey finds that 62% of GCs report increased AI tool use in their clinical workflow since 2024, and 88% believe AI will expand rather than replace their role. The profession enters its AI-augmentation era from a position of structural strength: chronic workforce shortage, mandatory credentialing, and an irreplaceable counseling core.

How to read this number

OEWS is a point-in-time survey snapshot, not a continuous time series; BLS advises against using it for year-over-year trend comparison.

Each dot is a cited figure over time; the dotted line only links them (values between aren't measured). Hollow dots are estimates.

Official statistic: Copied by a script from a statistics agency table or a published study's table, not retyped by hand. BLS figures and the forecast and exposure tables are also re-checked against that table on every data run. Researched context: Researched from the cited source rather than copied from it by a script, so it is not machine-checked yet. Spot a mistake? Each figure has a “Report an error” link.

Cited forecasts · present → 2035

Will AI replace genetic counselors? What the research says

Each figure is stated by the named source; we publish no forecasts of our own. Where sources disagree, we show the disagreement rather than an average.

Each figure is stated by the named source; we publish no forecasts of our own. Where sources disagree, the spread is the honest signal.

What published forecasts say
Forecast change in the number of people doing this work, as published by each named source. Bars share one scale on every role, centred on zero and reaching the end at ±30%. Grey marks a small change, 3% or less either way.
BLS Employment Projections 2025-35
→ 2035
+10.4%
BLS National Employment Matrix, 2025-35 cycle, line for SOC 29-9092 (Genetic counselors): 4.2 thousand jobs in 2025, projected 4.6 thousand in 2035, a change of +0.4 thousand (+10.4%). Matrix employment counts all jobs in the occupation, including self-employed workers (7.6% of this occupation in 2025). The average for all occupations in this cycle is +3.5%.
Official statisticReport an error
How exposed is this work to AI (research measures)
Scores as published by each study. Each row says what it measures. These measure what AI could technically do, not forecasts of jobs lost.
Eloundou et al. (2023), "GPTs are GPTs"
2023 study · Share of tasks exposed to LLMs (β, human-rated)
63.2%
of tasks
What this measures

Published occupation-level exposure from the paper's occ_level.csv for O*NET-SOC 29-9092.00 Genetic Counselors. Shown: human-rated β = 0.632, the share of the occupation's tasks an LLM could do in at least half the time at equal quality, counting tasks that need LLM-powered software at half weight (β = E1 + 0.5 × E2). Other published measures for this occupation: human-rated α (LLM alone) 0.368 and γ (all LLM-assisted) 0.895; GPT-4-rated β 0.5. This measures how much of the work an LLM could touch, not how many jobs disappear.

Official statisticReport an error
Today, in this role

What's changing day to day for genetic counselors

Three parts of your work where AI is already doing real lifting, and what stays yours.

AI is sitting alongside you hereDraft genetic counseling consultation letters, composing formal multi-page structured clinical letters summarizing the patient's personal and family history, genetic testing performed and results with ACMG classification rationale, clinical significance interpretation, management recommendations, and plan for at-risk relatives

Draft genetic counseling consultation letters, composing formal multi-page structured clinical letters summarizing the patient's personal and family history, genetic testing performed and results with ACMG classification rationale, clinical significance interpretation, management recommendations, and plan for at-risk relatives; using AI ambient documentation tools (Dragon Copilot, Heidi Health) to generate first-draft letters from session transcripts for GC review and attestation.[15],[16],[5]

Where your edge is

Genetic counseling consultation letters are among the most documentation-intensive outputs in any clinical specialty: a comprehensive BRCA1 result letter typically runs several pages and previously consumed many minutes of GC time per case. Dragon Copilot and Heidi Health can generate first-draft letters from session transcripts, dramatically reducing the per-letter time burden. NSGC 2025 Salary Survey: documentation burden cited by 54% of GCs as the primary career dissatisfier. The GC's review of AI-generated letters must confirm that variant classification rationale is accurate, management recommendations reflect current NCCN/ACOG guidelines, and the patient-specific nuances communicated in session are accurately captured. ABGC standards require the signed letter to reflect the GC's clinical assessment, not the AI draft.

AI is sitting alongside you hereReview and validate AI-generated variant classifications, examining ACMG/AMP criterion-level evidence assembled by Franklin by Genoox or Emedgene/Illumina for each variant (PVS1, PS1-PS4, PM1-PM6, BA1, BS1-BS4, BP1-BP7), confirming the algorithmic application of each criterion against current gene-specific knowledge, identifying variants where AI classification may be incorrect due to gene-specific nuances not captured by the algorithm, and signing off on the final clinical classification as the responsible certified genetic counselor.

Review and validate AI-generated variant classifications, examining ACMG/AMP criterion-level evidence assembled by Franklin by Genoox or Emedgene/Illumina for each variant (PVS1, PS1-PS4, PM1-PM6, BA1, BS1-BS4, BP1-BP7), confirming the algorithmic application of each criterion against current gene-specific knowledge, identifying variants where AI classification may be incorrect due to gene-specific nuances not captured by the algorithm, and signing off on the final clinical classification as the responsible certified genetic counselor.[6],[8],[13]

Where your edge is

AI variant classification tools (Franklin, Emedgene, Fabric Genomics) now handle first-pass ACMG/AMP criterion application: JAMA Oncology 2025 (study) found Franklin AI reduced per-case interpretation time without degrading classification accuracy. ACMG/AMP guidelines and clinical lab CLIA regulations still require a credentialed GC or medical geneticist to sign off on every clinical variant classification; AI tools are clinical decision support, not autonomous classifiers. Your value shifts to auditing AI criterion applications for gene-specific edge cases: splicing variants near but outside canonical splice sites, PM2 population frequency thresholds in under-represented ancestry groups, and PS4 evidence for ultra-rare disorders with small case-series literature. Develop depth in ACMG/AMP criterion adjudication for the gene panels most common in your specialty.

AI is sitting alongside you hereTriage and prioritize AI-flagged incidental germline variant findings from somatic tumor genomic panels, reviewing germline variant flags surfaced by tumor sequencing platforms (Tempus xT, Foundation Medicine) that identify potentially pathogenic germline variants in cancer predisposition genes discovered incidentally during tumor-normal sequencing, assessing whether findings are likely germline or somatic, prioritizing urgent cases (high-penetrance pathogenic variants requiring immediate clinical action), and determining which patients should be urgently referred for confirmatory germline testing.

Triage and prioritize AI-flagged incidental germline variant findings from somatic tumor genomic panels, reviewing germline variant flags surfaced by tumor sequencing platforms (Tempus xT, Foundation Medicine) that identify potentially pathogenic germline variants in cancer predisposition genes discovered incidentally during tumor-normal sequencing, assessing whether findings are likely germline or somatic, prioritizing urgent cases (high-penetrance pathogenic variants requiring immediate clinical action), and determining which patients should be urgently referred for confirmatory germline testing.[12],[5]

Where your edge is

Tumor-normal genomic sequencing for somatic cancer analysis increasingly reveals incidental germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2, MLH1, MSH2, and other cancer predisposition genes: NSGC 2025 reports this is the fastest-growing new workflow for oncology GCs. Tempus and Foundation Medicine AI flag potential germline findings and generate GC-referral prompts, but the triage decision (is this a true germline finding requiring urgent patient re-contact? does this patient understand a new hereditary risk was discovered incidentally?) is a nuanced clinical judgment combining molecular biology, genetic counseling ethics, and oncology clinical context that AI tools surface but do not resolve.

Where genetic counselors go next

Natural next steps for someone with your foundation: not exits, evolutions.

What each move takes

A direction you could grow

Medical and Health Services Managers

Genetic counselors who develop program leadership experience are well positioned for genetics program director, clinical genomics operations director, and population genomics program manager roles, classified under Medical and Health Services Managers. As AI variant interpretation tools (Franklin, Emedgene, Fabric Genomics) and population genomics platforms (Color Health, Tempus) are adopted at health systems, genetics programs need leaders who understand both the clinical genomics domain and the operational complexity of deploying AI at scale. The stepping stones are lead GC, genetics clinic coordinator, quality committee participation, and molecular tumor board leadership.

What you'd add
  • · Healthcare administration credentials: MHA (Master of Health Administration), MPH, or MBA with healthcare concentration
  • · Genomics program operations: population genomics program design, referral pathway optimization, variant database governance
  • · AI governance for clinical genomics: evaluating variant interpretation AI tool accuracy, overseeing lab-GC AI workflow implementation, monitoring ACMG compliance of AI outputs
  • · Healthcare finance: reimbursement modeling for genetic testing, value-based genomics program contracting (HBOC screening cost-effectiveness, cascade testing ROI)
  • · Team leadership: supervising a GC team, managing molecular pathologist and genetic physician relationships, directing lab-clinical integration workflows
What it takesSome new skills to pick up
Tools of the era

How has the work of genetic counselors changed since 1947?

The tools that defined the work, one line per era. Select an era to see how it reshaped the work.

  • Paper pedigree + karyotype (cytogenetics era)

    The first genetic counselors worked with paper. A three-generation pedigree drawn by hand on a blank sheet, inheritance pattern analysis performed by inspection and mental Mendelian arithmetic, and a conversation with the patient or family were the complete toolkit. In 1959 Jerome Lejeune identified trisomy 21 as the cause of Down syndrome, giving genetic counselors their first chromosomal diagnosis to discuss. Karyotyping from blood samples became available at university cytogenetics labs in the early 1960s, providing the first laboratory test a genetic counselor could order and interpret. The era was defined by limited diagnostic precision: most hereditary conditions could be named from the family history but not confirmed by any laboratory.

    Effect on the work

    The extremely small number of practitioners in this era (fewer than a few hundred nationwide, most employed informally within genetics departments) meant that labor effects were negligible at a macroeconomic level. The tool constraint was not productivity but knowledge: most genetic conditions could not be diagnosed at the molecular level, so counseling was necessarily probabilistic.

  • Amniocentesis + AFP screening (prenatal diagnostics era)

    Two technologies transformed genetic counseling from a small specialty into an essential part of obstetric care. Amniocentesis, used for chromosomal analysis of amniotic fluid, became a routine clinical option for older pregnant women by the late 1960s and early 1970s; its adoption required, and created demand for, trained genetic counselors to explain the procedure, results, and implications. Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) screening for neural tube defects was introduced as a population-level prenatal screen in the late 1970s and mandated for maternal age-based counseling by the early 1980s. These two tools pulled genetic counseling out of university specialty clinics and into mainstream obstetrics, created the first large recurring patient volume for the profession, and established prenatal counseling as the dominant practice setting for the next two decades. The Sarah Lawrence master's program (founded 1969) was designed explicitly around this emerging prenatal counseling function.

    Effect on the work

    The amniocentesis and AFP screening era was the primary driver of training program expansion: from one program in 1969 to many accredited programs by 1990, each producing many graduates per year. The NSGC, founded in 1979, drew its early membership almost entirely from counselors in prenatal and maternal-fetal medicine settings.

  • Human Genome Project + BRCA1/2 testing (commercial genomics era begins)

    The Human Genome Project, formally launched in 1990 by the US Department of Energy and NIH, transformed genetic counseling over the following decade by producing the reference sequence that made diagnostic molecular testing possible for thousands of conditions. The most immediate demand catalyst was practical and commercial: Myriad Genetics launched clinical BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in 1996, creating the first mass-market hereditary cancer genetic test. For the first time, a large population of women with family histories of breast or ovarian cancer could get a definitive test for hereditary risk. Hereditary cancer genetic counseling grew from a niche within genetics into a major practice setting. ABGC board certification had been established in 1993, and the certified genetic counselor credential became a requirement for employment at cancer centers and major academic medical centers running hereditary cancer programs.

    Effect on the work

    The 1990-2003 era roughly doubled the genetic counseling workforce, from an estimated 1,200 practitioners in 1990 to approximately 2,500 by 2000. The Human Genome Project completion in April 2003 set the stage for the next, larger demand wave.

  • Targeted gene panels + microarray (post-HGP diagnostics expansion)

    Following the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003, clinical genetics laboratories began offering increasingly broad targeted gene panels. Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) replaced the older karyotype as the first-line diagnostic for children with intellectual disabilities and developmental delay by the mid-2000s, capturing copy number variants invisible to traditional cytogenetics. The expansion of hereditary cancer panels beyond BRCA1/2 to include dozens of moderate-penetrance genes (PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, Lynch syndrome genes) multiplied the complexity of pre- and post-test counseling. Pharmacogenomics panels began entering clinical practice, adding a new counseling domain around drug metabolism and medication safety. This era saw genetic counselors expand from their prenatal and hereditary cancer home base into cardiology, neurology, and pediatric rare disease settings.

  • Next-generation sequencing (NGS): whole-exome and whole-genome in clinical practice

    Next-generation sequencing (NGS) moved from research to clinical practice in the early 2010s, and by 2012-2014 whole-exome sequencing (WES) and large multi-gene panels were available from clinical laboratories including GeneDx, Ambry Genetics, and Invitae. The cost of sequencing a human exome fell between 2011 and 2016. This made comprehensive genetic testing accessible in a way that fundamentally changed the counseling workload: pre-test consent for WES required explaining the possibility of secondary findings (pathogenic variants discovered in genes unrelated to the indication), a disclosure that was ethically and practically complex enough to require dedicated counseling sessions. The NGS era tripled the average number of variants requiring counselor interpretation per case compared to the single-gene or small-panel era.

    Effect on the work

    The NGS transition was the single largest driver of the genetic counseling workforce shortage that persists as of 2025. WES and WGS case volumes grew faster than training programs could produce certified counselors; health systems responded by exploring genetic counseling assistant (GCA) programs, telehealth delivery models (reducing geographic barriers to access), and eventually AI variant interpretation tools to expand GC productivity.

  • AI variant interpretation + ambient documentation (Franklin, Emedgene, Dragon Copilot era)

    AI-powered variant interpretation platforms entered clinical genetic counseling workflows beginning around 2019, with Franklin by Genoox and Emedgene (Illumina) becoming the leading tools. These platforms apply ACMG/AMP classification criteria algorithmically to genetic variants, integrating evidence from ClinVar, gnomAD, gene-specific databases, and machine learning models trained on tens of millions of variant observations. A multi-site JAMA Oncology study (2025) found that Franklin-assisted classification reduced per-case interpretation time without degrading accuracy. Ambient clinical documentation tools (Dragon Copilot, Heidi Health) arrived in 2023-2025 and began generating first-draft consultation letters from session transcripts, addressing the documentation burden that NSGC surveys consistently identify as the profession's primary source of career dissatisfaction. The defining characteristic of this era is the asymmetry of AI impact: the technical variant interpretation and documentation workflows are being substantially automated, while the clinical counseling encounter, psychosocial assessment, informed consent, and results disclosure remain outside the reach of any deployed AI system.

    Effect on the work

    AI productivity tools in the 2019-2025 era have not reduced genetic counselor headcount. NSGC 2025 survey: 62% of GCs report increased AI tool use in their clinical workflow since 2024; 88% believe AI will expand rather than replace their role.

Part of Healthcare · see all 69 roles →
Different role?

See the same long-arc view for your own profession.

Browse the directory by industry, or search by title or SOC code.

Browse all roles

Genetic Counselors employment and pay by year

On record since1947
Latest US employment3,740 (May 2025)Source: BLS OEWS May 2025Official statisticReport an error
Latest US median pay$100,040 (May 2025)Source: BLS OEWS May 2025Official statisticReport an error
Outlook+10.4% by 2035Source: BLS Employment Projections 2025-35Official statisticReport an error
View all 17 years of cited US data, each linked to its source
YearUS employmentAnnual pay (median unless marked)SourceReport
1975200n/aEst., Wikipedia Researched contextReport
19901,200$32,000Est., Wikipedia / NSGC sources (employment) Researched contextEst., University of Missouri Libraries (pay) Researched contextReport
20002,500$45,000Est., Wikipedia Researched contextReport
20122,000$56,800BLS OEWS May 2012 Official statisticReport
20131,980$63,590BLS OEWS May 2013 Official statisticReport
20142,180$67,500BLS OEWS May 2014 Official statisticReport
20152,520$72,090BLS OEWS May 2015 Official statisticReport
20162,720$74,120BLS OEWS May 2016 Official statisticReport
20172,660$77,480BLS OEWS May 2017 Official statisticReport
20182,640$80,370BLS OEWS May 2018 Official statisticReport
20192,390$81,880BLS OEWS May 2019 Official statisticReport
20202,280$85,700BLS OEWS May 2020 Official statisticReport
20212,740$80,150BLS OEWS May 2021 Official statisticReport
20223,220$89,990BLS OEWS May 2022 Official statisticReport
20233,050$95,770BLS OEWS May 2023 Official statisticReport
20243,510$98,910BLS OEWS May 2024 Official statisticReport
20253,740$100,040BLS OEWS May 2025 Official statisticReport
Embed this timeline on your site

Free for any site. Paste this where the timeline should appear; it stays interactive, every datapoint stays cited, and it sets no cookies on your page. How embedding works

<iframe src="https://futurehistory.earth/embed/29-9092"
  width="100%" height="430" style="border:0"
  title="Genetic Counselors, a Future History timeline"
  loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font-size:13px;margin:4px 0 0"><a href="https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/29-9092">Genetic Counselors: jobs and pay over time</a>, from Future History</p>

See all roles in Healthcare