Literature DB >> 20605992

Informing family members about a hereditary predisposition to cancer: attitudes and practices among clinical geneticists.

Yrrah H Stol1, Fred H Menko, Marjan J Westerman, Rien M J P A Janssens.   

Abstract

If a hereditary predisposition to colorectal cancer or breast cancer is diagnosed, most guidelines state that clinical geneticists should request index patients to inform their at-risk relatives about the existence of this condition in their family, thus enabling them to consider presymptomatic genetic testing. Those identified as mutation carriers can undertake strategies to reduce their risk of developing the disease or to facilitate early diagnosis. This procedure of informing relatives through the index patient has been criticised, as it results in relatively few requests for genetic testing, conceivably because a certain number of relatives remain uninformed. This pilot study explored attitudes toward informing family members and relevant practices among clinical geneticists. In general, clinical geneticists consider it to be in the interests of family members to be informed and acknowledge that this goal is not accomplished by current procedures. The reasons given for maintaining present practices despite this include clinical 'mores', uncertainty about the legal right of doctors to inform family members themselves, and, importantly, a lack of resources. We discuss these reasons from an ethical point of view and conclude that they are partly uninformed and inconsistent. If informing relatives is considered to be in their best interests, clinical geneticists should consider informing relatives themselves. In the common situation in which index patients do not object to informing relatives, no legal obstacles prevent geneticists from doing so. An evaluation of these findings among professionals may lead to a more active approach in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20605992     DOI: 10.1136/jme.2009.033324

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


  14 in total

Review 1.  How communication of genetic information within the family is addressed in genetic counselling: a systematic review of research evidence.

Authors:  Álvaro Mendes; Milena Paneque; Liliana Sousa; Angus Clarke; Jorge Sequeiros
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Supporting disclosure of genetic information to family members: professional practice and timelines in cancer genetics.

Authors:  Benjamin Derbez; Antoine de Pauw; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Sandrine de Montgolfier
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  Informing family members of individuals with Lynch syndrome: a guideline for clinical geneticists.

Authors:  Fred H Menko; Cora M Aalfs; Lidewij Henneman; Yrrah Stol; Miranda Wijdenes; Ellen Otten; Marleen M J Ploegmakers; Johan Legemaate; Ellen M A Smets; Guido M W R de Wert; Aad Tibben
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  Canadian Research Ethics Board Leadership Attitudes to the Return of Genetic Research Results to Individuals and Their Families.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; P Pearl O'Rourke; Laura M Beskow
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.718

5.  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

6.  Translating advances in cardiogenetics into effective clinical practice.

Authors:  Louise Bordeaux Silverstein; Marina Stolerman; Nadia Hidayatallah; Thomas McDonald; Christine A Walsh; Esma Paljevic; Lilian L Cohen; Robert W Marion; David Wasserman; Siobhan M Dolan
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2014-08-11

7.  Sharing information about domestic violence and abuse in healthcare: an analysis of English guidance and recommendations for good practice.

Authors:  Sandi Dheensa; Gene Feder
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 3.006

8.  Genetic diseases and information to relatives: practical and ethical issues for professionals after introduction of a legal framework in France.

Authors:  Diane d'Audiffret Van Haecke; Sandrine de Montgolfier
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 9.  Health-care professionals' responsibility to patients' relatives in genetic medicine: a systematic review and synthesis of empirical research.

Authors:  Sandi Dheensa; Angela Fenwick; Shiri Shkedi-Rafid; Gillian Crawford; Anneke Lucassen
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  'Is this knowledge mine and nobody else's? I don't feel that.' Patient views about consent, confidentiality and information-sharing in genetic medicine.

Authors:  Sandi Dheensa; Angela Fenwick; Anneke Lucassen
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 2.903

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.