Opinions about new reproductive genetic technologies: Hopes and fears for our genetic future

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 83, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1612-1621

  Kalfoglou, Andrea L ^a   Doksum, Teresa ^b   Bernhardt, Barbara ^c   Geller, Gail ^a   LeRoy, Lisa ^b   Mathews, Debra J H ^a   Evans, John H ^d   Doukas, David J ^e   Reame, Nancy ^f   Scott, Joan ^a   Hudson, Kathy ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ABT ASSOCIATES   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e University of Louisville School of Medicine   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Focus groups; Genetic modification; In vitro fertilization; Preimplantation genetic diagnosis; Public opinion; Qualitative research; Reproductive genetics; Sex selection

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL TRAIT; CELL SELECTION; DEMOGRAPHY; DISABILITY; DNA MODIFICATION; EDUCATION; ETHNOLOGY; FEAR; FEMALE; GENETIC PROCEDURES; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL ETHICS; NORMAL HUMAN; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIGION; REPRODUCTION; SPERM; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; GENETIC TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PUBLIC OPINION; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED;

EID: 20444482493     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.090     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. The President's Counsel on Bioethics. Reproduction and responsibility: the regulation of new biotechnologies. Washington, DC, March 2004. Available at: http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/reproductionandresponsibility/index.html. Accessed July 22, 2004.
2. M.S. Frankel, P. Morris A view from the field on Food and Drug Administration regulation report of a 2002 survey of U.S fertility clinics. Fertil Steril 79 2003 1060 1062
3. J.M. Drazen Inserting government between patient and physician N Engl J Med 350 2004 178 179
4. Government of Canada. BioPortal: The Government of Canada's biotechnology resource for consumers, industry, scientists and educators. Available at: http://bioportal.gc.ca/english/BioPortalHome.asp. Accessed March 5, 2005.
5. Human Genetics Commission [United Kingdom, Web site]. http://www.hgc.gov.uk/. Accessed March 1, 2005.
6. R. Pardo, C. Midden, J.D. Miller Attitudes toward biotechnology in the European Union J Biotechnol 98 2002 9 24
7. A. Kerr, S. Cunningham-Burley, A. Amos Drawing the line an analysis of lay people's discussions about the new genetics Public Underst Sci 7 1998 113 133
8. A. Kerr, S. Cunningham-Burley, A. Amos The new genetics and health mobilizing lay expertise Public Underst Sci 7 1998 41 60
9. I. Barns, R. Schibeci, A. Davison, R. Shaw "What do you think about genetic medicine?" Facilitating sociable public discourse on developments in the new genetics Sci Technol Hum Values 25 2000 283 308
10. H. Dietrich, R. Schibeci Beyond public perceptions of gene technology community participation in public policy in Australia Pub Underst Sci 12 2003 381 401
11. National Ethics Committee on Assisted Human Reproduction (NECAHR). Guidelines for preimplantation genetic diagnosis in New Zealand. Public Consultation Document. September 2004. Available at: http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh. nsf/0/d7d420cab2fbd7cecc256f2200777602?OpenDocument. Accessed January 3, 2005.
12. Human Genetics Commission and Human Fertilisation and Embryo Authority. Outcome of public consultation on preimplantation genetic diagnosis. November 2001. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/AboutHFEA/Consultations/ PGD%20outcome.pdf. Accessed July 22, 2004.
13. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Sex selection: options for regulation [2003]. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/AboutHFEA/Consultations. Accessed July 22, 2004.
14. Genetics and Public Policy Center. Public awareness and attitudes about reproductive genetic technology. December 9, 2002. Available at: www.DNApolicy.org. Accessed July 22, 2004.
15. Genetics and Public Policy Center. Reproductive genetic testing: What America thinks. December 2004. Available at www.DNApolicy.org. Accessed April 7, 2005.
16. E. Singer, A. Corning, M. Lamias The polls: Trends: genetic testing, engineering, and therapy: Awareness and attitudes Public Opin Q 62 1998 633 664
17. E. Singer, A.D. Corning, T. Antonucci Attitudes toward genetic testing and fetal diagnosis, 1990-1996 J Health Soc Behav 40 1999 429 445
18. E. Singer Public attitudes toward genetic testing Popul Res Policy Rev 10 1991 235 255
19. K.K. Milner, E.E. Collins, G.R. Connors, E.M. Petty Attitudes of young adults to prenatal screening and genetic correction for human attributes and psychiatric conditions Am J Med Genet 76 1998 111 119
20. Virginia Commonwealth University Life Sciences. VCU Life Sciences Surveys. Available at: http://www.vcu.edu/lifesci/centers/cen_lse_surveys.html. Accessed July 22, 2004.
21. S.L. Laskey, J. Williams, J. Pierre-Louis, M. O'Riordan, A. Matthews, N.H. Robin Attitudes of African American premedical students toward genetic testing and screening Genet Med 5 2003 39 54
22. E. Singer, T. Antonucci, J. Van Hoewyk Racial and ethnic variations in knowledge and attitudes about genetic testing Genet Test 8 2004 31 43
23. Communities of Color and Genetics Policy Project. Genome technology and reproduction: values and public policy. Web site. Available at: http://www.sph.umich.edu/genpolicy. Accessed July 22, 2004.
24. R.H. Bernard Research methods in anthropology qualitative and quantitative approaches 1995 AltaMira Walnut Creek, CA
25. K.M. MacQueen, E. McLeelan, K. Kay, B. Milstein Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis Cult Anthropol Methods 2 1998 31 36
26. J.W. Creswell Qualitative inquiry and research design choosing among five traditions 1997 SAGE London