Literature DB >> 7597466

Attributions for disability: the influence of genetic screening.

T M Marteau1, H Drake.   

Abstract

There is currently much debate on how the widespread availability of prenatal testing for fetal abnormalities influences attributions for the birth of children with disabilities. The aim of the current study is to determine how the birth of a child with Down syndrome is explained when information is provided on whether the mother underwent testing in pregnancy, and the reasons for that. Using a between subjects design, four groups (pregnant women, general samples of men and women, geneticists and obstetricians) from three EC countries (Germany, Portugal and the U.K.) completed one of two vignettes. The vignettes described a mother giving birth to a child with Down syndrome, in one, following her decline of the offer of testing, in the other, following no offer of test from the hospital. Subjects rated the mother's perceived control over the outcome, the extent to which she was to blame, and the extent to which health professionals might be to blame. In all three countries and for all study groups, screening history of the mother was the single most important factor influencing attributions of control and blame following the birth of a child with Down syndrome. A mother who declined the offer of testing was seen as having control over this outcome, and was in part blamed for it. The results of this study suggest that both health professionals and lay groups make judgments about women's roles in the birth of children with disabilities. These findings require replication in studies assessing attributions rated from spontaneous speech, of people with personal and professional experiences of the births of children with disabilities.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7597466     DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00180-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  11 in total

1.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and the 'new' eugenics.

Authors:  D S King
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  A population-based evaluation of the impact of antenatal screening for Down's syndrome in France, 1981-2000.

Authors:  Babak Khoshnood; Catherine De Vigan; Véronique Vodovar; Janine Goujard; François Goffinet
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 6.531

Review 3.  Illness representations, self-regulation, and genetic counseling: a theoretical review.

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 4.  Maternal decisions regarding prenatal diagnosis: rational choices or sensible decisions?

Authors:  Karen L Lawson; Roger A Pierson
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Can       Date:  2007-03

5.  Where are we going with preimplantation genetic diagnosis?

Authors:  Timothy Krahn
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-05-08       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 6.  The new genetics. Psychological responses to genetic testing.

Authors:  T M Marteau; R T Croyle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-02-28

Review 7.  Social and psychological issues associated with the new genetics.

Authors:  S Macintyre
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1997-08-29       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  The ghost in our genes: legal and ethical implications of epigenetics.

Authors:  Mark A Rothstein; Yu Cai; Gary E Marchant
Journal:  Health Matrix Clevel       Date:  2009

9.  Motherhood in the Context of Normative Discourse: Birth Stories of Mothers of Children with Down Syndrome.

Authors:  Susan L Gabel; Kathy Kotel
Journal:  J Med Humanit       Date:  2018-06

10.  Picking a frame for communicating about genetics: stigmas or challenges.

Authors:  Rachel A Smith
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 2.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.