Literature DB >> 15621894

Experiencing new forms of genetic choice: findings from an ethnographic study of preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

Celia Roberts1, Sarah Franklin.   

Abstract

Contemporary scientific and clinical knowledges and practices continue to make available new forms of genetic information, and to create new forms of reproductive choice. For example, couples at high risk of passing on a serious genetic condition to their offspring in Britain today have the opportunity to use Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) to select embryos that are unaffected by serious genetic disease. This information assists these couples in making reproductive choices. This article presents an analysis of patients' experiences of making the decision to undertake PGD treatment and of making reproductive choices based on genetic information. We present qualitative interview data from an ethnographic study of PGD based in two British clinics which indicate how these new forms of genetic choice are experienced by patients. Our data suggest that PGD patients make decisions about treatment in a complex way, taking multiple variables into account, and maintaining ongoing assessments of the multiple costs of engaging with PGD. Patients are aware of broader implications of their decisions, at personal, familial, and societal levels, as well as clinical ones. Based on these findings we argue that the ethical and social aspects of PGD are often as innovative as the scientific and medical aspects of this technique, and that in this sense, science cannot be described as "racing ahead" of society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15621894     DOI: 10.1080/14647270400016449

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Fertil (Camb)        ISSN: 1464-7273            Impact factor:   2.767


  11 in total

1.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: does age of onset matter (anymore)?

Authors:  Timothy Krahn
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2008-11-01

2.  Attitudes to reproductive genetic testing in women who had a positive BRCA test before having children: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Elizabeth Ormondroyd; Louise Donnelly; Clare Moynihan; Cornelie Savona; Elizabeth Bancroft; D Gareth Evans; Rosalind Eeles; Stuart Lavery; Maggie Watson
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Genetic diagnosis of embryos: clear explanation, not rhetoric, is needed.

Authors:  Chantal Bouffard; Stéphane Viville; Bartha Maria Knoppers
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2009-08-17       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  The decision-making process, experience, and perceptions of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) users.

Authors:  Shachar Zuckerman; Sigal Gooldin; David A Zeevi; Gheona Altarescu
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 5.  A systematic review of decision support needs of parents making child health decisions.

Authors:  Cath Jackson; Francine M Cheater; Innes Reid
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Acceptable applications of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) among Israeli PGD users.

Authors:  Shachar Zuckerman; David A Zeevi; Sigal Gooldin; Gheona Altarescu
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  A clinical perspective on ethical arguments around prenatal diagnosis and preimplantation genetic diagnosis for later onset inherited cancer predispositions.

Authors:  Tara Clancy
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 8.  Conceptualizing couples' decision making in PGD: emerging cognitive, emotional, and moral dimensions.

Authors:  Patricia E Hershberger; Penny F Pierce
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2010-01-08

9.  Testing the embryo, testing the fetus.

Authors:  K Ehrich; B Farsides; C Williams; Rosamund Scott
Journal:  Clin Ethics       Date:  2007-12-01

10.  Comparison of Patients' Ethical Perspectives of Preimplantation Embryo Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT-A) vs. Monogenic Disorders (PGT-M).

Authors:  J Zhang; L R Rubin; H Zierhut; L M Pastore
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.924

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.