Literature DB >> 32115901

Is preparation a good reason for prenatal genetic testing? Ethical and critical questions.

Marsha Michie1.   

Abstract

As prenatal genetic testing technologies have become both easier and more accessible, women are increasingly choosing prenatal genetic testing for a reason that is largely unexamined in the clinical literature: preparation. This reasoning, offered not only from pregnant women but frequently from testing laboratories and health care providers, reflects long-held assumptions that prenatal genetic results-properly delivered and followed with information, clinical surveillance, and/or social supports-prepare families for a child with a genetic condition, and even improve health and social outcomes for children and families. But these assumptions remain unexamined, since there are no clear definitions or recommendations for prenatal preparation. Preparation may refer to several overlapping ways in which prenatal information may change parents' approach to the rest of the pregnancy, including: (a) clinical activities, including surveillance, interventions, and delivery planning; (b) social and informational support, such as interacting with patient support groups and gathering information about quality of life; and (c) psychological "coping" or adjustments to the reality of raising a child with a genetic condition. These meanings and activities intersect and influence one another and form a foundation for postnatal family adaptation, but they are rarely parsed out in studies examining the impact of prenatal diagnosis. Based on previous work delineating conceptual models as middle terms between theory and reality, we are building a conceptual model that incorporates an empirical understanding of meanings and actions encompassed by prenatal preparation. Comparing diverse families' expectations with the resources they are offered can identify (mis)matches between priorities and approaches.
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioethics; genetic disorders; prenatal testing

Year:  2020        PMID: 32115901      PMCID: PMC7158133          DOI: 10.1002/bdr2.1651

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth Defects Res            Impact factor:   2.344


  66 in total

1.  'Collective fictions': similarities in reasons for accepting maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein screening among women of diverse ethnic and social class backgrounds.

Authors:  Nancy Anne Press; C H Browner
Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 2.587

2.  Prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: mothers' reflections on supports needed from diagnosis to birth.

Authors:  D T Helm; S Miranda; N A Chedd
Journal:  Ment Retard       Date:  1998-02

3.  Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  N Press; C H Browner
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Estimates of the live births, natural losses, and elective terminations with Down syndrome in the United States.

Authors:  Gert de Graaf; Frank Buckley; Brian G Skotko
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.802

5.  Experiences of prenatal diagnosis and decision-making about termination of pregnancy: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Jan Hodgson; Penelope Pitt; Sylvia Metcalfe; Jane Halliday; Melody Menezes; Jane Fisher; Chriselle Hickerton; Kerry Petersen; Belinda McClaren
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 2.100

6.  Health supervision for children with Down syndrome.

Authors:  Marilyn J Bull
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2011-07-25       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 7.  Supporting patients after disclosure of abnormal first trimester screening results.

Authors:  Jane Fisher
Journal:  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.927

8.  Prenatally diagnosed Down syndrome: mothers who continued their pregnancies evaluate their health care providers.

Authors:  Brian G Skotko
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Spanish- and English-Speaking Pregnant Women's Views on cfDNA and Other Prenatal Screening: Practical and Ethical Reflections.

Authors:  Erin Floyd; Megan A Allyse; Marsha Michie
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Risk and uncertainty: shifting decision making for aneuploidy screening to the first trimester of pregnancy.

Authors:  Ruth M Farrell; Natasha Dolgin; Susan A Flocke; Victoria Winbush; Mary Beth Mercer; Christian Simon
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  1 in total

1.  Attitudes of Filipino parents of children with Down syndrome on noninvasive prenatal testing.

Authors:  Leniza G de Castro-Hamoy; Ma-Am Joy R Tumulak; Maria Stephanie Fay S Cagayan; Peter A Sy; Nona Rachel C Mira; Mercy Y Laurino
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2022-06-02
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.