Literature DB >> 15571899

Providing solutions--defining problems: the imperative of disease prevention in genetic counselling.

Lene Koch1, Mette Nordahl Svendsen.   

Abstract

Common sense states that problems make people look for solutions. This article proposes the contrary, i.e. that solutions provide the framework within which certain problems can be stated and handled. Drawing on observations of cancer genetic counselling in Denmark and official recommendations concerning the practice of genetic counselling, this article explores how the new prophylactic possibilities become the lens through which risk factors are identified and defined as problems that require action. In particular, the question of how new possibilities to prevent hereditary disease challenge the traditional non-directive ethos of clinical genetics provides the occasion to analyse governmentality processes in clinical genetic dialogues. The article argues that an imperative of choosing disease prevention in genetic counselling transforms the notion of non-directiveness as well as the notions of autonomy and informed consent. The transforming event is the transmission of expert knowledge on genetic risk from counsellor to counsellee. This process of knowledge transmission creates autonomous individuals who, through the medium of choice, consent voluntarily to take personal responsibility for themselves and their relatives. Conceived as a health technology, genetic counselling is a practice through which hegemonic knowledge claims about saving lives by acting responsibly is created. Disease prevention as the solution to increased risks comes to stand out as the right way of relating to oneself, the family, and society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15571899     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.06.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  5 in total

1.  The Ethics of the Societal Entrenchment-approach and the case of live uterus transplantation-IVF.

Authors:  Lisa Guntram; Kristin Zeiler
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2019-12

2.  When to break the news and whose responsibility is it? A cross-sectional qualitative study of health professionals' views regarding disclosure of BRCA genetic cancer risk.

Authors:  Alison Luk Young; Phyllis N Butow; Katherine M Tucker; Claire E Wakefield; Emma Healey; Rachel Williams
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Discussing options between patients and health care professionals in genetic diagnosis: ethical and legal criteria.

Authors:  Pilar Nicolás
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2007-09-15       Impact factor: 2.857

4.  Counseling customers: emerging roles for genetic counselors in the direct-to-consumer genetic testing market.

Authors:  Anna Harris; Susan E Kelly; Sally Wyatt
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  An organizational perspective on ethics as a form of regulation.

Authors:  Klaus Hoeyer; Niels Lynöe
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2009-06-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.