Attitudes of healthcare professionals and parents regarding genetic testing for violent traits in childhood

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 580-586

  Campbell, E ^a   Ross, L F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR GENETICS; CHILD BEHAVIOR; COMPREHENSION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; FEMALE; GENE ISOLATION; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC TRAIT; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; INTERVIEW; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PARENTAL BEHAVIOR; PEDIATRICIAN; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES; VIOLENCE;

EMPIRICAL APPROACH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

ATTITUDE; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CHILD; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS, BEHAVIORAL; HUMANS; PARENTS; PEDIATRICS; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; VIOLENCE;

EID: 11144291050     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.2003.005389     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Jacobs PA, Brunton M, Melville MM, et al. Aggressive behavior, mental sub-normality, and the XYY male. Nature 1965;208:1351-2.
2. Witkin HA, Goodenough DR, Hirschhorn K, XYY men: are they criminally aggressive? Sciences-New York 1977;17:10-13.
3. Culliton B. XYY: Harvard researcher under fire stops newborn screening. Science 1975;186:128,4-5, at 1284.
4. Steinfels MO, Levine C. The XYY controversy: researching violence and genetics. Hastings Cent Rep 1980; 10: 1-32.
5. Andrews L. Predicting and punishing antisocial acts. In: Carson R, Rothstein M, eds. Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999;116-56, at 124-6.
6. Baron M. Crimes, genes, and responsibility. In: Wasserman D, Wachbroit R, eds. Genetics and Criminal Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001;201-23 at 209.
7. Brunner HG, Nelen M, Breakfield XO, et al. Abnormal behavior associated with a point mutation in the structural gene for monoamine oxidase. Science 1993;262:578-80.
8. Brunner HG. MAOA deficiency and abnormal behaviour: perspectives on an association. Ciba Foundation Symposium 1996; 194:155-64, discussion 164-7.
9. Verkraik R. It's in my genes, m'lud; American lawyers are trying to use genetic evidence to reduce their clients' sentences. Could it work in Britain? The Independent (London) May 10, 1995;Law: 31.
10. See reference 5: 116-17.
11. Carson R, Rothstein M, eds. Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.
12. Wasserman D, Wachbroit R, eds. Genetics and Criminal Behavior. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
13. Andrews L. Future Perfect. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001.
14. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genetics and human behaviour. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2002:xxi.
15. Savulescu J, Robertson S. Is there a case in favour of predictive genetic testing in young children? Bioethics 2001; 15 27-49.
16. Dalby S. GIG response to the UK Clinical Genetics Society report. J Med Genet 1995;32:490-4.
17. Clarke A. Parents' responses to predictive testing for their children. J Med Genet 1997;34:174-5.
18. See reference 14: appendix 2: 195.
19. Anonymous. Researchers link gene pattern, male homosexuality. St Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri) July 16, 1993:8A.
20. Painter K. Is there a gay gene? Key evidence: more maternal kin are gay. USA Today July 16, 1993:1A.
21. Petit C. New evidence of "gay gene" in some men. Study says hereditary trait is passed along by mothers. The San Francisco Chronicle July 16, 1993:A1.
22. Reuter. Brainy sons owe it all to mom; geneticists say. The Toronto Star June 28, 1996:A3.
23. Connor S. Scientists find gene for intelligence. Times Newspapers (London) October 19, 1997, home news.
24. Wade N. Gene linked to high IQ is reported found with new technique. New York Times May 14, 1998;2:A16.
25. Nelkin D, Lindee MS. The DNA Mystique: The Gene as Cultural Icon. See Ch. 6: Creating Natural Distinctions. New York: Freeman, 1995:102-6.
26. See reference 13: 145-80.
27. Rothstein MA. Behavioral genetic determinism: its effects on culture and law. In: Carson R, Rothstein MA, eds. Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999:90-115.
28. Rose SPR. Neurogenetic determinism and the new euphenics. BMJ 1998;317:1707-08.
29. Murray TH. Genetic exceptionalism and "future diaries": is genetic information different from other medical information. In: Rothstein MA, ed. Genetic Secrets: Protecting Privacy and Confidentiality in the Genetic Era. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997:60-73, at 71.
30. See reference 14: appendix 2.
31. Campbell E, Ross LF. Professional and personal atfitudes about access and confidentiality in the genetic testing of children: a pilot study. Gen Testing 2003;7:123-30.
32. See reference 14: xxi-xxii.
33. Institute of Medicine. Assessing Genetic Risks: Implications for Health and Social Policy. Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1994.
34. Working Party of the Clinical Genetics Society (UK). The genetic testing of children. J Med Gen 1994;31:785-97.
35. American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG)/American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG). Points to Consider: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Implications of Genetic Testing in Children and Adolescents. Am J Hum Gen 1995;57:1233-41.
36. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Committee on Bioethics. Ethical issues with genetic testing in pediatrics. Pediatrics 2001;107:1451-5.
37. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genetic Screening - Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 1993.
38. Human Genetics Society of Australasia. Predictive testing in children and adolescents. 2003; www.hgsa.com.au/policy/ptca.html (accessed on).
39. See reference 34:787.
40. See reference 33:10.
41. See reference 35:785.
42. See reference 36:1233.
43. See reference 37:1453, 1454.
44. See reference 35: Introduction, Background.
45. Crewdson J. Gay gene theory is not backed up by other studies; Allegations of selective data probed. Houston Chronicle June 26, 1995.
46. Hawkes N. Scientists dismiss gay gene theory. The Times (London) April 23, 1999, home news.
47. Anonymous. New study can't locate "gay gene". Chicago Sun-Times April 23, 1999:37.
48. AP. In new study, genes get less credit for human intelligence. St Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri) July 31, 1997:08A.
49. Wasserman D, Wachbroit R. Introduction: methods, meanings, and morals. In: Wasserman D, Wachbroit R, eds. Genetics and Criminal Behavior. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001:1-21, at 3-4.
50. See reference 14: xxv.
51. See reference 14: section 13.22, 138.
52. See reference 25: 138,139,142.
53. Nelkin D. Behavioral genetics and dismantling the welfare state. In: Carson R, Rothstein M, eds. Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999:156-71, at 167.
54. Brown TC, Wertz DC, Fox RC, et al. Ethical perspectives of genetic counselors: does area of specialty matter? National Society of Genetic Counselors 1999 Education Conference [abstract]. J Gen Couns 1999;8:413-414.
55. Schoenfeld M, Myers RH, Berkman B, et al. Potential impact of a predictive test on the gene frequency of Huntington disease. Am J Med Gen 1984;18:423-9.
56. Stern R, Eldridge R. Attitudes of patients and their relatives to Huntington's disease. J Med Genet 1975;12 217-23.
57. Craufurd D, Dodge A, Kerzin-Storrer L, et al. Uptake of presymptomatic predictive testing for Huntington's disease. Lancet 1989;ii:603-5.
58. Quaid KA, Brandt J, Folstein SE. The decision to be tested for Huntington's disease. JAMA 1987;257:3362.
59. See reference 5:133.
60. See reference 13:94.
61. Parens E. Taking behavioral genetics seriously. In: Howell JH, Sale WF, eds. Life Choices. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2000:556-69, at 565.
62. King PA. The past as prologue: race, class, and gene discrimination. In: Annas GJ, Elias S, eds. Gene Mapping: Using Low and Ethics as Guides. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992:94-111, at 102.
63. Duster T. The social consequences of genetic disclosure. In Carson R, Rothstein M, eds. Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999:172-88.
64. Kerr A, Cunningham-Burley S, Amos A, Drawing the line: an analysis of lay people's discussions about the new genetics. Public Understand Sci 1998;7:113-33, at 130.
65. Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN. Focus groups: theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publicafions, 1990.
66. Channock SJ, Kundra V, Johnson FL, et al. The other side of the bed: what care givers can learn from listening to patients and their families. In: Pizzo P, Poplack D, eds. Principles and practice of pediatric oncology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997:1267-82.
67. Carey MA, Smith MW. Capturing the group effect in focus groups: a special concern for analysis. Qual Health Res 1994; 4 123-7.
68. Hiller EH, Landenburger G, Natowicz MR. Public participation in medical policy-making and the status of consumer autonomy: the example of newborn-screening programs in the United States. Am J Pub Health 1997;87:1280-8.
69. Human Genetics Commission. GENES DIRECT: Ensuring the effective oversight of genetic tests supplied directly to the public. March, 2003. On the web at www.hgc.gov.uk/genesdirect/genesdirect_full.pdf (accessed on July 19 2004).
70. Lee TA, Brennan TA. Direct-to-consumer marketing of high-technology screening tests. N Engl J Med 2002;346 529-31.
71. Williams-Jones B. Where there's a web, there's a way: commercial genetic testing and the internet. Comm Gen 2003; 6 46-57.
72. Levitt M. Let the consumer decide? The regulation of commercial genetic testing. J Med Ethics 2001;27:398-403.