Literature DB >> 19294336

Decision-making about inherited cancer risk: exploring dimensions of genetic responsibility.

Holly Etchegary1, Fiona Miller, Sonya deLaat, Brenda Wilson, June Carroll, Mario Cappelli.   

Abstract

Since genetic information has implications for family members, some choices about genetic risk may be influenced by perceptions of responsibility to relatives. Drawing upon 25 semi-structured interviews with test recipients in Canada, this study explored decisions about inherited breast-ovarian and colon cancer. Qualitative data analysis revealed the pervasive significance of genetic responsibility in test decisions. We highlight three dimensions of genetic responsibility: 1) to know about the self for self; 2) to know about the self for others; 3) to know about the self to oblige others to know. It is argued that these dimensions of genetic responsibility have implications for test decisions, family relationships and other family members' desire to know (or not know) and to act (or not act) with respect to their own genetic risk. In particular, genetic responsibility may play out as a framing of a relative's moral obligation to know their risk that could obviate any interest they might have in not knowing. We conclude that perceptions of responsibility to-and of-other family members be thoroughly explored in genetic counseling sessions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19294336     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-009-9218-z

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


  34 in total

1.  In defence of ignorance: genetic information and the right not to know.

Authors:  Graeme T Laurie
Journal:  Eur J Health Law       Date:  1999-06

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.  Family communication about genetic risk: the little that is known.

Authors:  Brenda J Wilson; Karen Forrest; Edwin R van Teijlingen; Lorna McKee; Neva Haites; Eric Matthews; Sheila A Simpson
Journal:  Community Genet       Date:  2004

4.  Facilitating family communication about predictive genetic testing: probands' perceptions.

Authors:  Clara L Gaff; Veronica Collins; Tiffany Symes; Jane Halliday
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 5.  Men's decision-making about predictive BRCA1/2 testing: the role of family.

Authors:  N Hallowell; A Ardern-Jones; R Eeles; C Foster; A Lucassen; C Moynihan; M Watson
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Ethical issues in cancer genetics: I 1) whose information is it?

Authors:  Katherine A Schneider; Anu B Chittenden; Kelly J Branda; Meredith A Keenan; Steven Joffe; Andrea Farkas Patenaude; Hazel Reynolds; Karin Dent; Sonja Eubanks; Jill Goldman; Bonnie Leroy; Nancy Steinberg Warren; Kelly Taylor; Cate Walsh Vockley; Judy E Garber
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Guilt, blame and responsibility: men's understanding of their role in the transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations within their family.

Authors:  Nina Hallowell; Audrey Arden-Jones; Ros Eeles; Claire Foster; Anneke Lucassen; Clare Moynihan; Maggie Watson
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2006-11

8.  Accommodating risk: responses to BRCA1/2 genetic testing of women who have had cancer.

Authors:  N Hallowell; C Foster; R Eeles; A Ardern-Jones; M Watson
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  Breast and ovarian cancer incidence in BRCA1-mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium.

Authors:  D F Easton; D Ford; D T Bishop
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 10.  Ignorance, information and autonomy.

Authors:  J Harris; K Keywood
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2001-09
View more
  14 in total

1.  Comparing family members' motivations and attitudes towards genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Caroline Dancyger; Jonathan A Smith; Chris Jacobs; Melissa Wallace; Susan Michie
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Distinctive psychological and social experiences of women choosing prophylactic oophorectomy for cancer prevention.

Authors:  Rachel Meadows; Tasleem J Padamsee; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  Health Care Women Int       Date:  2018-02-02

3.  Researching Experiences of Cancer Risk Through Online Blogs: A Reflexive Account of Working Toward Ethical Practice.

Authors:  Emily Ross
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2019-08-17       Impact factor: 1.742

4.  Timing and context: important considerations in the return of genetic results to research participants.

Authors:  Kate A McBride; Nina Hallowell; Martin H N Tattersall; Judy Kirk; Mandy L Ballinger; David M Thomas; Gillian Mitchell; Mary-Anne Young
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2015-05-26

5.  Heightened perception of breast cancer risk in young women at risk of familial breast cancer.

Authors:  Rachael Glassey; Moira O'Connor; Angela Ives; Christobel Saunders; Sarah O'Sullivan; Sarah J Hardcastle
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Disclosing Genetic Information to Family Members About Inherited Cardiac Arrhythmias: An Obligation or a Choice?

Authors:  Rick D Vavolizza; Isha Kalia; Kathleen Erskine Aaron; Louise B Silverstein; Dorit Barlevy; David Wasserman; Christine Walsh; Robert W Marion; Siobhan M Dolan
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Preserving the self: the process of decision making about hereditary breast cancer and ovarian cancer risk reduction.

Authors:  A Fuchsia Howard; Lynda G Balneaves; Joan L Bottorff; Patricia Rodney
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2010-10-27

8.  Incorporating direct-to-consumer genomic information into patient care: attitudes and experiences of primary care physicians.

Authors:  Barbara A Bernhardt; Cara Zayac; Erynn S Gordon; Lisa Wawak; Reed E Pyeritz; Sarah E Gollust
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 2.512

9.  "The cancer bond": exploring the formation of cancer risk perception in families with Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Aunchalee E L Palmquist; Laura M Koehly; Susan K Peterson; Margarette Shegog; Sally W Vernon; Ellen R Gritz
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-04-17       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Testing personalized medicine: patient and physician expectations of next-generation genomic sequencing in late-stage cancer care.

Authors:  Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Jessica P Bytautas; Philippe L Bedard; Scott Ernst; Hal Hirte; Sebastien Hotte; Amit Oza; Albiruni Razak; Stephen Welch; Eric Winquist; Janet Dancey; Lillian L Siu
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 4.246

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.