Literature DB >> 19739280

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

Allyn McConkie-Rosell1, Gail A Spiridigliozzi.   

Abstract

Genetic testing in minor children presents a complex ethical and social problem. Current guidelines state that genetic testing of children is recommended only under circumstances where a clear medical or psychosocial benefit to the child can be demonstrated. Because of the difficulty in determining a psychosocial benefit, the discussion about genetic testing of minors ultimately tends to focus on who has the right to make the decision and whose right to autonomy is jeopardized, the parent's or the child's, when there is no identified medical benefit. Historically, a western bioethics paradigm, Principlism, has been used to guide genetic counseling sessions and genetic-testing guidelines for minors. This bioethics paradigm is guided by the principles: respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Genetic testing in children, when viewed through a traditional bioethics filter is limited by its focus on the individual because children are not only individuals, they are also integral parts of a larger social context, that of their family. Because this bioethics paradigm places a strong emphasis on individual autonomy, the family's beliefs and values and the parents' concern for their children may be overshadowed by the medical community's attempt to preserve the child's "right" to an autonomous decision about genetic testing. The purpose of this paper is to first discuss the circumstances in which genetic testing of minors occurs and then present a theoretical and ethics-based conceptual framework that may be useful in the development of genetic counseling interventions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 19739280     DOI: 10.1023/b:jogc.0000013379.90587.ef

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


  39 in total

Review 1.  Levels of meaning in family stress theory.

Authors:  J M Patterson; A W Garwick
Journal:  Fam Process       Date:  1994-09

Review 2.  Annotation: genetic research, family life, and clinical practice.

Authors:  M Richards
Journal:  J Child Psychol Psychiatry       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 8.982

3.  Psychosocial and educational outcomes associated with home- and clinic-based pretest education and cystic fibrosis carrier testing among a population of at-risk relatives.

Authors:  B Cheuvront; J R Sorensen; N P Callanan; S C Stearns; B M DeVellis
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1998-02-17

4.  Screening guidelines and premorbid diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis using linkage.

Authors:  G M Petersen; J Slack; Y Nakamura
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  Fragile X syndrome: diagnostic and carrier testing. Working Group of the Genetic Screening Subcommittee of the Clinical Practice Committee. American College of Medical Genetics.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1994-12-01

6.  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

7.  Attitudes toward the genetic testing of children among adults in a Utah-based kindred tested for a BRCA1 mutation.

Authors:  H A Hamann; R T Croyle; V L Venne; B J Baty; K R Smith; J R Botkin
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  2000-05-01

8.  Longitudinal study of observed and perceived family influences on problem-focused coping behaviors of preadolescents with spina bifida.

Authors:  W L McKernon; G N Holmbeck; C R Colder; J S Hommeyer; W Shapera; V Westhoven
Journal:  J Pediatr Psychol       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb

Review 9.  Huntington's disease predictive testing: the case for an assessment approach to requests from adolescents.

Authors:  J Binedell; J R Soldan; J Scourfield; P S Harper
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 6.318

10.  Parents' and children's attitudes toward the enrollment of minors in genetic susceptibility research: implications for informed consent.

Authors:  Barbara A Bernhardt; Ellen S Tambor; Gertrude Fraser; Lawrence S Wissow; Gail Geller
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2003-02-01       Impact factor: 2.802

View more
  20 in total

1.  Counseling adolescents and the challenges for genetic counselors.

Authors:  Alice Callard; Jessica Williams; Heather Skirton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Helping Couples Fulfill the "Highest of Life's Goals": Mate Selection, Marriage Counselling, and Genetic Counseling in United States.

Authors:  Devon Stillwell
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Predictive testing of eighteen year olds: counseling challenges.

Authors:  Clara L Gaff; Elly Lynch; Lesley Spencer
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  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

5.  Predictive genetic testing in a young child: a case report.

Authors:  Gillian Crawford; Anneke Lucassen
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-08-12       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Predictive genetic testing in children: where are we now? An overview and a UK perspective.

Authors:  Anneke Lucassen; Jonathan Montgomery
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.375

7.  Respecting autonomous decision making among Filipinos: a re-emphasis in genetic counseling.

Authors:  Jonathan Diego Cura
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Assessment of parental disclosure of a 22q11.2 deletion syndrome diagnosis and implications for clinicians.

Authors:  Dana Faux; Kelly Schoch; Sonja Eubanks; Stephen R Hooper; Vandana Shashi
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-08-31       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: a Survey of Perspectives on Carrier Testing and Communication Within the Family.

Authors:  Brenna Hayes; Susan Hassed; Jae Lindsay Chaloner; Christopher E Aston; Carrie Guy
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Genetic testing of children for familial cancers: a comparative legal perspective on consent, communication of information and confidentiality.

Authors:  Roy Gilbar
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-07-17       Impact factor: 2.375

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.