Literature DB >> 19567688

Reconsidering prenatal screening: an empirical-ethical approach to understand moral dilemmas as a question of personal preferences.

E García1, D R M Timmermans, E van Leeuwen.   

Abstract

In contrast to most Western countries, routine offer of prenatal screening is considered problematic in the Netherlands. The main argument against offering it to every pregnant woman is that women would be brought into a moral dilemma when deciding whether to use screening or not. This paper explores whether the active offer of a prenatal screening test indeed confronts women with a moral dilemma. A qualitative study was developed, based on a randomised controlled trial that aimed to assess the decision-making process of women when confronted with a test offer. A sample of 59 women was interviewed about the different factors balanced in decision-making. Participants felt themselves caught between a need for knowledge and their unwillingness to take on responsibility. Conflict was reported between wishes, preferences and ethical views regarding parenthood; however, women did not seem to be caught in a choice between two or more ethical principles. Participants balanced the interests of the family against that of the fetus in line with their values and their personal circumstances. Therefore, we conclude that they are not so much faced with an ethical dilemma as conflicting interests. We propose that caregivers should provide the opportunity for the woman to discuss her wishes and doubts to facilitate her decision. This approach would help women to assess the meaning of testing within their parental duties towards their unborn child and their current offspring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19567688     DOI: 10.1136/jme.2008.026880

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  9 in total

1.  Moral implications of obstetric technologies for pregnancy and motherhood.

Authors:  Susanne Brauer
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2016-03

2.  Should non-invasiveness change informed consent procedures for prenatal diagnosis?

Authors:  Zuzana Deans; Ainsley J Newson
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2011-06

3.  It's complicated - Factors predicting decisional conflict in prenatal diagnostic testing.

Authors:  Cécile Muller; Linda D Cameron
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  The scope of prenatal diagnosis for women at increased risk for aneuploidies: views and preferences of professionals and potential users.

Authors:  Antina de Jong; Wybo J Dondorp; Anja Krumeich; Julie Boonekamp; Jan M M van Lith; Guido M W R de Wert
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-11-09

5.  A routine tool with far-reaching influence: Australian midwives' views on the use of ultrasound during pregnancy.

Authors:  Kristina Edvardsson; Ingrid Mogren; Ann Lalos; Margareta Persson; Rhonda Small
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Considering medical risk information and communicating values: A mixed-method study of women's choice in prenatal testing.

Authors:  An Chen; Henni Tenhunen; Paulus Torkki; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Vedran Stefanovic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Attitude, knowledge and informed choice towards prenatal screening for Down Syndrome: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Melania Elena Pop-Tudose; Dana Popescu-Spineni; Petru Armean; Ioan Victor Pop
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  'It made you think twice' - an interview study of women's perception of a web-based decision aid concerning screening and diagnostic testing for fetal anomalies.

Authors:  Annika Åhman; Anna Sarkadi; Peter Lindgren; Christine Rubertsson
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Facilitating autonomous, confident and satisfying choices: a mixed-method study of women's choice-making in prenatal screening for common aneuploidies.

Authors:  An Chen; Henni Tenhunen; Paulus Torkki; Antti Peltokorpi; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Vedran Stefanovic
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 3.007

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.