Literature DB >> 16047090

Policy recommendations for carrier testing and predictive testing in childhood: a distinction that makes a real difference.

Susan Hogben1, Paula Boddington.   

Abstract

The genetic testing of children raises many ethical concerns. This paper examines how five position statements from Canada, UK and USA, which present guidelines for good practice in this area produce different recommendations for carrier testing and predictive testing. We find that the genetic information generated through carrier testing is routinely presented as less serious than that generated from predictive testing. Additionally, the reproductive implications of predictive testing are also routinely erased. Consequently, the papers argue strongly against predictive testing but advise caution against carrier testing in somewhat weaker terms. We argue that these differences rest on assumptions about the status of reproduction in people's lives and on an ethical stance that foregrounds the self over others. We propose that questioning the crude and sharp distinction between carrier and predictive testing in principle may enable practitioners and parents/families to make more nuanced decisions in practice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16047090     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-005-4840-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  10 in total

Review 1.  Genetic information, rights, and autonomy.

Authors:  M Häyry; T Takala
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2001-09

2.  The Tiresias complex: Huntington's disease as a paradigm of testing for late-onset disorders.

Authors:  N S Wexler
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Genetic links, family ties, and social bonds: rights and responsibilities in the face of genetic knowledge.

Authors:  R Rhodes
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  1998-02

4.  Threat to Parental Role: A Possible Mechanism of Altered Self-Concept Related to Carrier Knowledge.

Authors:  A McConkie-Rosell; B M DeVellis
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  The genetic testing of children. Working Party of the Clinical Genetics Society (UK)

Authors:  A Clarke
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 6.318

6.  GIG response to the UK Clinical Genetics Society report "The genetic testing of children".

Authors:  S Dalby
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 6.318

7.  Ethical issues with genetic testing in pediatrics.

Authors: 
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  The fragile X premutation presenting as essential tremor.

Authors:  Maureen A Leehey; Renato P Munhoz; Anthony E Lang; James A Brunberg; Jim Grigsby; Claudia Greco; Sebastian Jacquemont; Flora Tassone; A M Lozano; Paul J Hagerman; Randi J Hagerman
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  2003-01

9.  "Family matters": a conceptual framework for genetic testing in children.

Authors:  Allyn McConkie-Rosell; Gail A Spiridigliozzi
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Points to consider: ethical, legal, and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. American Society of Human Genetics Board of Directors, American College of Medical Genetics Board of Directors.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 11.025

  10 in total
  5 in total

Review 1.  Working up policy: the use of specific disease exemplars in formulating general principles governing childhood genetic testing.

Authors:  Paula Boddington; Susan Hogben
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2006-03

2.  Genetic testing of children at risk for adult onset conditions: when is testing indicated?

Authors:  N Lwiwski; C R Greenberg; A A Mhanni
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-07-08       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Fragile X screening: attitudes of genetic health professionals.

Authors:  Kruti Acharya; Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 2.802

4.  Developmental and behavioral pediatricians' attitudes toward screening for fragile X.

Authors:  Kruti Acharya; Abigail Schindler
Journal:  Am J Intellect Dev Disabil       Date:  2013-07

5.  Adolescent carrier testing in practice: the impact of legal rulings and problems with "gillick competence".

Authors:  Paula Boddington; Maggie Gregory
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-08-29       Impact factor: 2.537

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.