What constitutes 'balanced information in the practitioners' portrayals of Down's syndrome?

Midwifery

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 230-237

  Williams, Clare ^a   Alderson, Priscilla ^b   Farsides, Bobbie ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AWARENESS; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABILITY; DOWN SYNDROME; EMOTION; EXPERIENCE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MIDWIFE; PERINATAL CARE; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; SAMPLE SIZE; WORKPLACE; ADULT; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FEMALE; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; LITERATURE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PREGNANCY; STANDARD; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; ANECDOTES; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DOWN SYNDROME; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDWIFERY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PERINATAL CARE; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS;

EID: 0036724999     PISSN: 02666138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1054/midw.2002.0316     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Abramsky L, Hall S, Levitan J et al. 2001 What parents are told after prenatal diagnosis of a sex chromosome abnormality: interview and questionnaire study. British Medical Journal 322: 463-466
2. Alderson P 2001 Down's syndrome: cost, quality and value of life. Social Science and Medicine 53: 627-638
3. Alderson P, Goodey C 1998 Enabling education: experiences in special and ordinary schools. Tufnell Press, London
4. Alderson P, Farsides B, Williams C 2001 Cross currents in genetics and ethics around the millenium - final report. Social Science Research Unit, London
5. Alderson P, Farsides B, Williams C 2002 Examining ethics in practice: health service professionals' evaluations of in-hospital ethics seminars. Nursing Ethics 9(5): 470-485
6. Bramwell R, Carter D 2001 An exploration of midwives' and obstetricians' knowledge of genetic screening in pregnancy and their perception of appropriate counseling. Midwifery 17: 133-141
7. Department of Health 2000 Second report of the UK national screening committee. Department of Health, London
8. Drake H, Reid M, Marteau T 1996 Attitudes towards termination for fetal abnormality: comparisons in three European countries. Clinical Genetics 49: 134-140
9. Duff M, Hoghton M, Scheepers M 2000 More training is needed in health care of people with learning disabilities (letter). British Medical Journal 321: 385
10. Edwins J 2000 From a different planet: women who choose to continue their pregnancy after a diagnosis of Down's syndrome. The Practising Midwife 3: 21-24
11. Heyman B, Henriksen M, Maughan K 1998 Probabilities and health risks: a qualitative approach. Social Science and Medicine 47: 1295-1306
12. Kerr A, Cunningham-Burley S, Amos A 1998 Eugenics and the new genetics in Britain: examining contemporary professionals' accounts. Public Understanding of Science 7: 113-133
13. Lippman A 1994 The genetic construction of prenatal testing: choice, consent or conformity for women? In: Rothenberg K, Thomson E. (eds) Women and prenatal testing. Ohio University Press, Columbus
14. Lofland J, Lofland L 1984 Analyzing social settings. Wadsworth, California
15. Mayor S 1999 News section. British Medical Journal 318: 617
16. Noble J 1998 Natural history of Down's syndrome: a brief review for those involved in antenatal screening. Journal of Medical Screening 5: 172-177
17. Nuffield Council on Bioethics 1993 Genetic screening: ethical issues. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London
18. Parens E, Asch A 2000 The disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing: reflections and recommendations. In: Parens E, Asch A (eds) Prenatal testing and disability rights. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC
19. Press N, Browner C 1997 Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis. Social Science and Medicine 45: 979-989
20. Rose H 2002 Building genethics from below. In: Bendelow G, Carpenter M, Vautier C et al. (eds) Gender, health and healing: the public, private divide. Routledge, London
21. Saenz R 1999 Primary care of infants and young children with Down syndrome. American Family Physician 59: 395-396
22. Sawtell M 1996 Prenatal testing for Down's Syndrome (leaflet). Available from the Down's Syndrome Association, London, UK
23. Shakespeare, T 1999 Losing the plot? Medical and activist discourses of contemporary genetics and disability. Sociology of Health and Illness 21: 669-688
24. Smith D, Shaw R, Slack J et al. 1995 Training obstetricians and midwives to present screening tests: evaluation of two brief interventions. Prenatal Diagnosis 15: 317-324
25. Strauss A, Corbin J 1990 Basics of qualitative research. Sage, London
26. Van Buggenhout G, Trommelen J, Schoenmaker A et al. 1999 Down syndrome in a population of elderly mentally retarded patients: genetic-diagnostic survey and implications for medical care. American Journal Medical Genetics 85: 376-384
27. Wald N, Huttly W, Hennessy C 1999 Down's syndrome screening in the UK in 1998. Lancet 354: 1264
28. Weber R 1990 Basic content analysis. Sage, London
29. Wertz D, Gregg R. 2000 Genetics services in a social, ethical and policy context: a collaboration between consumers and providers. Journal of Medical Ethics 26: 261-265
30. Williams C, Alderson P, Farsides B 2002a Too many choices? Hospital and community staff reflect on the future of prenatal screening. Social Science and Medicine 55(5): 743-753
31. Williams C, Alderson P, Farsides B 2002b Is nondirectiveness possible within the context of antenatal screening and testing? Social Science and Medicine 54: 339-347
32. Williams C, Alderson P, Farsides B 2002c Dilemmas encountered by health practitioners offering nuchal translucency screening: a qualitative case study. Prenatal Diagnosis 22: 216-220
33. Wolfendale S 1997 Meeting special needs in the early years. Paul Chapman, London