Literature DB >> 19288201

Public perceptions of ethical issues regarding adult predictive genetic testing.

Douglas K Martin1, Heather L Greenwood, Jeff Nisker.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the views of members of the general public regarding ethical issues in adult predictive genetic testing. The literature pertaining to ethical issues regarding to adult predictive genetic testing is largely restricted to the views of 'experts' who have emphasized informed consent, patent issues, and insurance discrimination. Occasionally the views of patients who have undergone genetic counselling and testing have been elicited, adding psychosocial and family issues. However, the general public has not had the opportunity to contribute. In order to explore theatre as a health policy research tool, 1,200 audience members attended the play 'Sarah's Daughters' in seven Canadian cities, following which audience discussions were audiotaped. This study performed a secondary qualitative analysis of the data to identify the ethical issues of adult predictive genetic testing important to members of the general public. The identified issues were: (1) need for public education; (2) choice to undergo genetic counselling and testing; (3) access to genetic counselling and testing; and (4) obligations regarding the handling of genetic information. Audience members emphasized public education and access to information regarding potential choices, which was different from the emphasis on informed consent and other ethical issues prominent in the literature. Members of the general public emphasized ethical issues that were different than those identified by experts and patients. It is essential that members of the public be included in complex and controversial public policy decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19288201     DOI: 10.1007/s10728-009-0113-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Care Anal        ISSN: 1065-3058


  28 in total

1.  Accountability for reasonableness.

Authors:  N Daniels
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-11-25

2.  Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information.

Authors:  N Hallowell; C Foster; R Eeles; A Ardern-Jones; V Murday; M Watson
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 3.  Ethical, legal, and social implications of genomic medicine.

Authors:  Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-08-07       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 4.  Are genetic self-tests dangerous? Assessing the commercialization of genetic testing in terms of personal autonomy.

Authors:  Ludvig Beckman
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2004

5.  Theatre as a public engagement tool for health-policy development.

Authors:  Jeff Nisker; Douglas K Martin; Robyn Bluhm; Abdallah S Daar
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2005-12-06       Impact factor: 2.980

6.  Health needs assessment. Whose priorities? Listening to users and the public.

Authors:  J Jordan; T Dowswell; S Harrison; R J Lilford; M Mort
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-05-30

Review 7.  Lay participation in health care decision making: a conceptual framework.

Authors:  C Charles; S DeMaio
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.265

8.  Participation in health care priority-setting through the eyes of the participants.

Authors:  Douglas K Martin; Julia Abelson; Peter A Singer
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  2002-10

9.  Pharmaceutical policy and the lay public.

Authors:  Janine M Traulsen; Anna Birna Almarsdóttir
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2005-08

Review 10.  The autonomy paradox: predictive genetic testing and autonomy: three essential problems.

Authors:  A K Huibers; A van 't Spijker
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  1998-09
View more
  4 in total

1.  Risk for Patient Harm in Canadian Genetic Counseling Practice: It's Time to Consider Regulation.

Authors:  Andrea L Shugar; Nada Quercia; Christopher Trevors; Marina M Rabideau; Sohnee Ahmed
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Easing the global burden of diarrhoeal disease: can synthetic biology help?

Authors:  Prerna Vohra; Garry W Blakely
Journal:  Syst Synth Biol       Date:  2013-07-20

3.  Harm, hype and evidence: ELSI research and policy guidance.

Authors:  Timothy Caulfield; Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Yann Joly; Robert Cook-Deegan
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 11.117

Review 4.  Integrating citizen engagement into evidence-informed health policy-making in eastern Europe and central Asia: scoping study and future research priorities.

Authors:  Bobby Macaulay; Marge Reinap; Michael G Wilson; Tanja Kuchenmüller
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2022-01-18
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.