Literature DB >> 15705307

Public, expert and patients' opinions on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in Germany.

Tanja Krones1, Elmar Schlüter, Konstantin Manolopoulos, Karin Bock, Hans-Rudolf Tinneberg, Manuela C Koch, Martin Lindner, Georg F Hoffmann, Ertan Mayatepek, Gerd Huels, Elke Neuwohner, Susan El Ansari, Thomas Wissner, Gerd Richter.   

Abstract

The regulation of reproductive medicine technologies differs significantly among Western industrialized countries. In Germany, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is prohibited due to the Embryo Protection Act, which came into force in 1991. In the last 5 years, this prohibition has been vigorously debated. In the present studies, which are part of the German research programme on ethical implications of the Human Genome Project, representative surveys were undertaken to assess the attitudes on PGD in the general population (n = 1017), five relevant expert groups (n = 879), high genetic risk couples (n = 324) and couples undergoing IVF (n = 108). All groups surveyed clearly favoured allowing PGD in Germany. Compared with the results of recently conducted population surveys in the UK and the USA, where PGD is already carried out, public approval of PGD does not differ significantly. The influence of restrictive biopolitics on the apparently liberal public opinion towards new reproductive technology seems to be marginal according to the present data, which should carefully be considered in the ongoing legislation process on human reproduction.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction; Legal Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15705307     DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60812-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online        ISSN: 1472-6483            Impact factor:   3.828


  9 in total

1.  Social sex selection and the balance of the sexes: empirical evidence from Germany, the UK, and the US.

Authors:  E Dahl; M Beutel; B Brosig; S Grüssner; Y Stöbel-Richter; H-R Tinneberg; Elmar Brähler
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2006-09-17       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  The decision-making process of genetically at-risk couples considering preimplantation genetic diagnosis: initial findings from a grounded theory study.

Authors:  Patricia E Hershberger; Agatha M Gallo; Karen Kavanaugh; Ellen Olshansky; Alan Schwartz; Ilan Tur-Kaspa
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Public perspectives on the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

Authors:  William D Winkelman; Stacey A Missmer; Dale Myers; Elizabeth S Ginsburg
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Comparison of attitudes regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis among patients with hereditary cancer syndromes.

Authors:  Thereasa A Rich; Mei Liu; Carol J Etzel; Sarah A Bannon; Maureen E Mork; Kaylene Ready; Devki S Saraiya; Elizabeth G Grubbs; Nancy D Perrier; Karen H Lu; Banu K Arun; Terri L Woodard; Leslie R Schover; Jennifer K Litton
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.375

5.  [Desire for a child and desired children--possibilities and limits of reproductive biomedicine].

Authors:  Tanja Krones; Elke Neuwohner; Susan El Ansari; Thomas Wissner; Gerd Richter
Journal:  Ethik Med       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 0.474

Review 6.  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

7.  Diversity and uniformity in genetic responsibility: moral attitudes of patients, relatives and lay people in Germany and Israel.

Authors:  Aviad E Raz; Silke Schicktanz
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2009-07-24

8.  Knowledge and Educational Needs about Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) among Oncology Nurses.

Authors:  Gwendolyn P Quinn; Caprice Knapp; Ivana Sehovic; Danielle Ung; Meghan Bowman; Luis Gonzalez; Susan T Vadaparampil
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 4.241

9.  Why not integrate ethics in HTA: identification and assessment of the reasons.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  GMS Health Technol Assess       Date:  2014-11-26
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.