Literature DB >> 10986947

Collective fear, individualized risk: the social and cultural context of genetic testing for breast cancer.

N Press1, J R Fishman, B A Koenig.   

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to provide a critical examination of two aspects of culture and biomedicine that have helped to shape the meaning and practice of genetic testing for breast cancer. These are: (1) the cultural construction of fear of breast cancer, which has been fuelled in part by (2) the predominance of a 'risk' paradigm in contemporary biomedicine. The increasing elaboration and delineation of risk factors and risk numbers are in part intended to help women to contend with their fear of breast cancer. However, because there is no known cure or foolproof prevention for breast cancer, risk designations bring with them recommendations for vigilant surveillance strategies and screening guidelines. We argue that these in effect exacerbate women's fears of breast cancer itself. The volatile combination of discourses of fear, risk and surveillance have significant ethical and social consequences for women's lives and well-being. Genetic testing decisions are made within this context; if nurses understand this context they can play an important role in helping women to cope with the anxiety and fear of breast cancer risk.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10986947     DOI: 10.1177/096973300000700306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nurs Ethics        ISSN: 0969-7330            Impact factor:   2.874


  10 in total

1.  Using lessons learned from BRCA testing and marketing: what lies ahead for whole genome scanning services.

Authors:  Michelle L McGowan; Jennifer R Fishman
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 11.229

2.  Experiencing Cancer. An Ethnographic Study on Illness and Disease.

Authors:  Christine Holmberg
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

3.  Uncertain Futures: Individual Risk and Social Context in Decision-Making in Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Simon J Craddock Lee
Journal:  Health Risk Soc       Date:  2010-04

4.  Incomplete Penetrance of Population-Based Genetic Screening Results in Electronic Health Record.

Authors:  Gai Elhanan; Daniel Kiser; Iva Neveux; Shaun Dabe; Alexandre Bolze; William J Metcalf; James T Lu; Joseph J Grzymski
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Risking 'Safety': Breast Cancer, Prognosis, and the Strategic Enterprise of Life.

Authors:  Nadine Ehlers
Journal:  J Med Humanit       Date:  2016-03

6.  BRCA patients in Cuba, Greece and Germany: Comparative perspectives on public health, the state and the partial reproduction of 'neoliberal' subjects.

Authors:  Sahra Gibbon; Eirini Kampriani; Andrea Zur Nieden
Journal:  Biosocieties       Date:  2010-11-22

Review 7.  Genetics: breast cancer as an exemplar.

Authors:  Rebekah Hamilton
Journal:  Nurs Clin North Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.208

8.  Should Researchers Offer Results to Family Members of Cancer Biobank Participants? A Mixed-Methods Study of Proband and Family Preferences.

Authors:  Deborah R Gordon; Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Marguerite Robinson; Wesley O Petersen; Jason S Egginton; Kari G Chaffee; Gloria M Petersen; Susan M Wolf; Barbara A Koenig
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2018-12-31

9.  "I would like to discuss it further with an expert": a focus group study of Finnish adults' perspectives on genetic secondary findings.

Authors:  M Vornanen; K Aktan-Collan; N Hallowell; H Konttinen; H Kääriäinen; A Haukkala
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2018-01-16

10.  Biomarkers, the molecular gaze and the transformation of cancer survivorship.

Authors:  Kirsten Bell
Journal:  Biosocieties       Date:  2013-06
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.