Literature DB >> 7137431

A survey to evaluate parental consent as public policy for neonatal screening.

R Faden, A J Chwalow, N A Holtzman, S D Horn.   

Abstract

Most states currently have laws which result in compulsory neonatal screening practices, despite a widespread consensus that participation in genetic services and programs should be voluntary. In 1976, Maryland adopted a regulation designed to respect parents' rights to refuse neonatal screening by imposing a parental consent requirement. The results of a study designed to evaluate the effects of this regulation are reviewed here. Many health care providers were unaware of the parental consent regulation. However, hospitals were generally in compliance with the technical stipulations of the regulations. There was little evidence that the regulation resulted in additional costs to the health care system, either in terms of hospital staff time or in terms of loss of efficiency in the number of infants screened. Mothers affected by the regulation were largely in favor of being informed about neonatal screening and learned a significant amount of new information from the disclosure process. They were almost evenly divided on whether they favored parental consent.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7137431      PMCID: PMC1650541          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.72.12.1347

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  4 in total

1.  Application of cost-benefit analysis to a PKU screening program.

Authors:  K C Steiner; H A Smith
Journal:  Inquiry       Date:  1973-12       Impact factor: 1.730

2.  What we do and do not know about informed consent.

Authors:  A Meisel; L H Roth
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1981-11-27       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Disclosure standards and informed consent.

Authors:  R R Faden; C Lewis; C Becker; A I Faden; J Freeman
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 2.265

4.  Parental rights, child welfare, and public health: the case of PKU screening.

Authors:  R R Faden; N A Holtzman; A J Chwalow
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 9.308

  4 in total
  14 in total

Review 1.  Increasing informed uptake and non-uptake of screening: evidence from a systematic review.

Authors:  R G Jepson; C A Forbes; A J Sowden; R A Lewis
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Questioning the consensus: managing carrier status results generated by newborn screening.

Authors:  Fiona Alice Miller; Jason Scott Robert; Robin Z Hayeems
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-12-04       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Considering consent: a structural equation modelling analysis of factors influencing decisional quality when accepting newborn screening.

Authors:  Stuart G Nicholls; Kevin W Southern
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 4.982

4.  Sickle cell screening policies as portent: how will the human genome project affect public sector genetic services?

Authors:  D D Phoenix; S M Lybrook; R W Trottier; F C Hodgin; L A Crandall
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 1.798

5.  The expansion of newborn screening: is reproductive benefit an appropriate pursuit?

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Denise Avard; Bartha M Knoppers; Martina C Cornel; Pascal Borry
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 53.242

6.  Genetic screening and public health.

Authors:  N A Holtzman
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  A clinician's view of the mass screening of the newborn for inherited diseases: current practice and future considerations.

Authors:  I B Sardharwalla; J E Wraith
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.982

8.  Parental attitudes toward ethical and social issues surrounding the expansion of newborn screening using new technologies.

Authors:  L E Hasegawa; K A Fergus; N Ojeda; S M Au
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2010-07-30       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 9.  Points to Consider: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Implications of Genetic Testing in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; John W Belmont; Jonathan S Berg; Benjamin E Berkman; Yvonne Bombard; Ingrid A Holm; Howard P Levy; Kelly E Ormond; Howard M Saal; Nancy B Spinner; Benjamin S Wilfond; Joseph D McInerney
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 11.025

10.  Mandatory PKU screening: the other side of the looking glass.

Authors:  G J Annas
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 9.308

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.