Literature DB >> 26757798

Ethics, genetic testing, and athletic talent: children's best interests, and the right to an open (athletic) future.

Silvia Camporesi1, Mike J McNamee2.   

Abstract

In this paper we discuss the ethics of genetics-based talent identification programs in sports. We discuss the validity and reliability of the tests and the claims made by direct to consumer companies, before presenting a range of ethical issues concerning child-parent/guardian relations raised by these tests, which we frame in terms of parental/guardian duties, children's rights, and best interests. We argue that greater ethical emphasis needs to be put on the parental decision on the wellbeing on the child going forward, not on ex post justifications on the basis of good and bad consequences. Best interests decisions made by a third party seem to comprise both subjective and objective elements, but only a holistic approach can do justice to these questions by addressing the wellbeing of the child in a temporal manner and taking into account the child's perspective on its wellbeing. Such decisions must address wider questions of what a good (sports)parent ought do to help the child flourish and how to balance the future-adult focus necessary to nurture talent with the wellbeing of the child in the present. We conclude that current genetic tests for "talent" do not predict aptitude or success to any significant degree and are therefore only marginally pertinent for talent identification. Claims that go beyond current science are culpable and attempt to exploit widespread but naïve perceptions of the efficacy of genetics information to predict athletic futures. Sports physicians and health care professionals involved in sport medicine should therefore discourage the use of these tests.
Copyright © 2016 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  children; direct-to-consumer; ethics; future; genetics; talent

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26757798     DOI: 10.1152/physiolgenomics.00104.2015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Genomics        ISSN: 1094-8341            Impact factor:   3.107


  7 in total

1.  Promoting Physical Activity Through Youth Sports Programs: It's Social.

Authors:  Erin K Howie; Bryce T Daniels; Justin M Guagliano
Journal:  Am J Lifestyle Med       Date:  2018-01-27

2.  Can the ability to adapt to exercise be considered a talent-and if so, can we test for it?

Authors:  Craig Pickering; John Kiely
Journal:  Sports Med Open       Date:  2017-11-29

3.  Letter to the editor: A genetic-based algorithm for personalized resistance training.

Authors:  A Karanikolou; G Wang; Y Pitsiladis
Journal:  Biol Sport       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 2.806

4.  The current use, and opinions of elite athletes and support staff in relation to genetic testing in elite sport within the UK.

Authors:  Ian Varley; Seema Patel; Alun G Williams; Philip J Hennis
Journal:  Biol Sport       Date:  2017-10-11       Impact factor: 2.806

5.  Rethinking the "open future" argument against predictive genetic testing of children.

Authors:  Jeremy R Garrett; John D Lantos; Leslie G Biesecker; Janet E Childerhose; Wendy K Chung; Ingrid A Holm; Barbara A Koenig; Jean E McEwen; Benjamin S Wilfond; Kyle Brothers
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 6.  Can Genetic Testing Identify Talent for Sport?

Authors:  Craig Pickering; John Kiely; Jozo Grgic; Alejandro Lucia; Juan Del Coso
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 4.096

Review 7.  What does the best interests principle of the convention on the rights of the child mean for paediatric healthcare?

Authors:  Julian W März
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2022-09-09       Impact factor: 3.860

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.