Literature DB >> 9579758

Women's decision-making in prenatal screening.

P Santalahti1, E Hemminki, A M Latikka, M Ryynänen.   

Abstract

With serum screening (MS-AFP and hCG testing for Down's syndrome) women have to make several decisions in a limited time: whether to participate in the screening in the first place; then, if increased risk for fetal abnormality is detected, whether to have a diagnostic test, and finally, what to do if fetal abnormality is detected. The aim of this study was to examine how women themselves in an unselected population describe their decision-making in the different phases of serum screening. Women receiving a positive result from serum screening in two Finnish towns from September 1993 to March 1994 and a group of individually matched controls were invited to semistructured interviews; 45 index and 46 control women (79% of those invited) participated between their 29th and 37th weeks of gestation (mean 31 weeks). Although serum screening was most often presented as voluntary or as an option, half the women described participation as a routine or self-evident act; only one-fourth of the women described actively deciding about participation. After a positive screening result, women's reactions to diagnostic tests, and their intentions if disability would be detected, varied greatly. Most of the women actively decided about having diagnostic tests, but for 23% participation in diagnostic testing was called a self-evident act. Women's intentions regarding abortion varied from a firm decision to abort to a firm decision not to abort, and many remained ambivalent. Prenatal screening, which demands the making of several decisions in a limited time and is offered to all pregnant women as part of established maternity care, is not based on every participant's active decision-making and thus creates an ethical problem. This problem should receive special attention from those who develop, introduce and decide on new health care practices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9579758     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(97)10038-7

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


  16 in total

1.  Down's syndrome screening is unethical: views of today's research ethics committees.

Authors:  T M Reynolds
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Authoritative knowledge, the technological imperative and women's responses to prenatal diagnostic technologies.

Authors:  Judith L M McCoyd
Journal:  Cult Med Psychiatry       Date:  2010-12

3.  Informed choice of pregnant women in prenatal screening tests for Down's syndrome.

Authors:  H-H Chiang; Y-M Yu Chao; Y-S Yuh
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.903

4.  Talking about disability in prenatal genetic counseling: a report of two interactive workshops.

Authors:  Jan Hodgson; Jon Weil
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Factors that affect the decision to undergo amniocentesis in women with normal Down syndrome screening results: it is all about the age.

Authors:  Julia Grinshpun-Cohen; Talya Miron-Shatz; Liat Ries-Levavi; Elon Pras
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  The ethics of antenatal screening: lessons from Canute.

Authors:  Timothy M Reynolds
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2009-11

Review 7.  A systematic review of decision support needs of parents making child health decisions.

Authors:  Cath Jackson; Francine M Cheater; Innes Reid
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Impact of increased risk for fetal aneuploidy on maternal mood: a prospective longitudinal study.

Authors:  Dayna L Nevay; Catriona Hippman; Angela Inglis; Arianne Albert; Jehannine Austin
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 3.636

9.  Exploring informed choice in the context of prenatal testing: findings from a qualitative study.

Authors:  Beth K Potter; Natasha O'Reilly; Holly Etchegary; Heather Howley; Ian D Graham; Mark Walker; Doug Coyle; Yelena Chorny; Mario Cappelli; Isabelle Boland; Brenda J Wilson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Perceptions of prenatal testing for birth defects among rural Latinas.

Authors:  Courtney Griffiths; Miriam Kuppermann
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2007-10-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.