Literature DB >> 3815882

Client reactions to genetic counseling: self-reports of influence.

D C Wertz, J R Sorenson.   

Abstract

Of 628 clients completing questionnaires six months after genetic counseling, 273 (43.5%) reported that their reproductive plans had been influenced by the counseling session. Of those who said that they were influenced, 144 (52.7%) held the same reproductive plans that they reported before counseling: 41 (15%) were planning more pregnancies, 36 (13.2%) were planning fewer, and 52 (19.1%) became reproductively uncertain. A similar pattern of stability and change appeared in the reproductive plans of those who reported that they were not influenced by genetic counseling. Stepwise logistic regression indicated that clients who reported that their plans were influenced: came to counseling to get information for making a decision about whether to have a child; discussed this decision in depth with the counselor; and had more education than clients who said that they were not influenced. We found no evidence that counseling was supplanting clients' own personal values. In the discussion, we suggest several reasons why clients of higher socio-economic status are more likely than others to report that they are influenced, and discuss the ethical implications of these results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3815882     DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1986.tb01917.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  7 in total

1.  Client perceptions of the impact of genetic counseling: an exploratory study.

Authors:  Patricia McCarthy Veach; Sarah E Truesdell; Bonnie S LeRoy; Dianne M Bartels
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Provider gender and moral reasoning: the politics of an "ethics of care.

Authors:  Dorothy C Wertz
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Perception of genetic risk among genetic counselors.

Authors:  J Roggenbuck; J E Olson; T A Sellers; C Ludowese
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Nondirectiveness in genetic counseling: an empirical study.

Authors:  S Michie; F Bron; M Bobrow; T M Marteau
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  How the magnitude of clinical severity and recurrence risk affects reproductive decisions in adult males with different forms of progressive muscular dystrophy.

Authors:  S Eggers; M Zatz
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 6.318

6.  Reassurance through surveillance in the face of clinical uncertainty: the experience of women at risk of familial breast cancer.

Authors:  Evelyn P. Parsons; Valerie Beale; Helen Bennett; Jo Jones; Emma J Lycett
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Decision-making about reproductive choices among individuals at-risk for Huntington's disease.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman; Deborah Thorne; Jennifer Williamson; Wendy Chung; Karen Marder
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.717

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.