Literature DB >> 12838558

Medical Geneticists' duty to warn at-risk relatives for genetic disease.

Marni J Falk1, R Beth Dugan, Mary Ann O'Riordan, Anne L Matthews, Nathaniel H Robin.   

Abstract

A patient who refuses to notify their relatives of potential at-risk status brings a genetics provider to face conflicting ethical principles and ill-defined legal precedent. Genetics professionals' views on the disclosure of patient information to at-risk relatives have remained largely unexamined. Prior analyses have been limited to identifying factors contributing to genetics providers' self-predicted responses in hypothetical scenarios. Our group was the first to examine the clinical experience of genetic counselors with this issue [Dugan et al., 2003]. We report here results from our follow-up survey of medical geneticists who are members of either the American Society of Human Genetics and/or American College of Medical Genetics in an effort to identify their experiences in warning at-risk relatives and the factors driving their decision-making processes. Over two-thirds of medical geneticists surveyed (69%, 143/206) believe they do bear responsibility to warn their patients' relatives when found to be at-risk for genetic disease. One-quarter (25%, 31/123) of medical geneticists who faced the dilemma of a patient refusing to notify their at-risk relatives seriously considered disclosure to those at-risk relatives without patient consent. Only four respondents proceeded to warn at-risk relatives of their status. Whereas genetic counselors cited emotional issues as playing a primary role in their decision not to warn, medical geneticists identified patient confidentiality, eventual case resolution by other means, and legal liability as the major factors leading to non-disclosure in 76% of actual scenarios. Responsibilities of medical geneticists, genetic counselors, and non-genetics healthcare professionals facing this issue will need to be more clearly defined to provide optimal medical care within the bounds of acceptable practice. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12838558     DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.20227

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med Genet A        ISSN: 1552-4825            Impact factor:   2.802


  27 in total

Review 1.  How communication of genetic information within the family is addressed in genetic counselling: a systematic review of research evidence.

Authors:  Álvaro Mendes; Milena Paneque; Liliana Sousa; Angus Clarke; Jorge Sequeiros
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Letting the family know: balancing ethics and effectiveness when notifying relatives about genetic testing for a familial disorder.

Authors:  G K Suthers; J Armstrong; J McCormack; D Trott
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 6.318

Review 3.  Ethical issues of predictive genetic testing for diabetes.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2009-07-01

4.  Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Uri Ladabaum; Grace Wang; Jonathan Terdiman; Amie Blanco; Miriam Kuppermann; C Richard Boland; James Ford; Elena Elkin; Kathryn A Phillips
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-07-19       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  A Relational Approach to Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Rowan Forbes Shepherd; Tamara Kayali Browne; Linda Warwick
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Ethical and legal implications of cancer genetic testing: do physicians have a duty to warn patients' relatives about possible genetic risks?

Authors:  Courtney Storm; Rinki Agarwal; Kenneth Offit
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.840

7.  Patient preferences regarding recontact by cancer genetics clinicians.

Authors:  Constance A Griffin; Jennifer E Axilbund; Ann Marie Codori; Ginny Deise; Betty May; Cheryl Pendergrass; Miriam Tillery; Jill D Trimbath; Francis M Giardiello
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2007-02-17       Impact factor: 2.375

8.  Evaluating the utilization of educational materials in communicating about Lynch syndrome to at-risk relatives.

Authors:  Kristen Dilzell; Kerry Kingham; Kelly Ormond; Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.375

9.  Should healthcare providers have a duty to warn family members of individuals with an HNPCC-causing mutation? A survey of patients from the Ontario Familial Colon Cancer Registry.

Authors:  Kelly Kohut; Michael Manno; Steven Gallinger; Mary Jane Esplen
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 6.318

Review 10.  Guidelines for disclosing genetic information to family members: from development to use.

Authors:  Béatrice Godard; Thierry Hurlimann; Martin Letendre; Nathalie Egalité
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.375

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.