Policy recommendations for carrier testing and predictive testing in childhood: A distinction that makes a real difference

Journal of Genetic Counseling

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 271-281

  Hogben, Susan ^a   Boddington, Paula ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Carrier testing; Children; Discourse analysis; Ethics; Genetic testing; policy; Predictive testing

Indexed keywords

CANADA; CHILD; CHILDHOOD; FAMILY; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC PROCEDURES; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HETEROZYGOTE; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PARENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCTION; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

CHILD; GENETIC DISEASES, X-LINKED; GENETIC SCREENING; HETEROZYGOTE DETECTION; HUMANS; POLICY MAKING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS;

EID: 23244443377     PISSN: 10597700     EISSN: 15733599     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10897-005-4840-x     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. American Academy of Pediatrics [AAP] (2001). Ethical issues with genetic testing in pediatrics (RE9924). Pediatrics, 107, 1451-1455.
2. American Medical Association (1996) Genetic testing of children (Policy, E-2.138). Retrieved December 2002, from http://www.ama-assn.org
3. American Society of Human Genetics & The American College of Medical Genetics [ASHG/ACMG] (1995). Points to consider: Ethical, legal and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. Am. J. Hum Genet, 57, 1233-1241.
4. Baier, A. (1994). Moral prejudices: Essays on ethics. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
5. Belgian Society of Human Genetics (2003) Guidelines for predictive genetic testing for late onset disorders. Retrieved November 2003, from http://www.beshg.be/Pages/guidelines.html
6. Boddington, P., & Hogben, S. (2004) Drawing on diseases: The use of specific exemplars in formulating and applying principles governing genetic testing. Poster presented at HUGO Human Genome Meeting Berlin, Germany, April, 2004.
7. Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Spark, G. (1973). Invisible loyalties: Reciprocity in intergenerational family therapy. New York: Harper & Row.
8. Canadian Pediatric Society [CPS] (2003). Guidelines for genetic testing of health children, position statement (B 2003-01). Paediatric Child Health, 8(1), 42-45.
9. Clarke, A. (1998). The genetic testing of children. Oxford: Bios Scientific.
10. Clinical Genetics Society [CGS] (1994). The genetic testing of children: Report of a working party of the clinical genetics society (UK). Medical Genetics, 31, 785-797.
11. Corea, G. (1985). The mother machine: Reproductive technologies from artificial insemination to artificial wombs. New York: Harper & Row.
12. Dudgeon, M. R., & Inhorn, M. C. (2003). Gender, masculinity, and reproduction: anthropological perspectivas. International Journal of Men's Health, 2, 31-57.
13. Dworkin, R. (1977).Taking rights seriously. London: Duckworth.
14. Edmondson, R. (1984). Rhetoric in sociology. London: Macmillan.
15. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
16. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
17. Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (1993). Editor's introduction. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 1-17). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
18. Franklin, S. (1998). Making miracles: Scientific progress and the facts of life. In S. Franklin & H. Ragone (Eds.), Reproducing reproduction: Kinship, power, and technological innovation (pp. 102-117). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
19. Genetic Interest Group [GIG] (1995). Genetics interest group response to the UK Clinical Genetics Society report "The genetic testing of children." Journal of Medical Genetics, 32, 490-491.
20. Gillligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
21. Gillott, G. (1998). Childhood testing for carrier status: The perspective of the Genetic Interest Group. In A. Clarke (Ed.), The genetic testing of children (pp. 97-102). Oxford: Bios Scientific.
22. Glover, J. (Ed.). (1990).Utilitarianism and its critics. New York: MacMillan.
23. Hajer, M. A. (1993). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalization of practice. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 43-71). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
24. Hajer, M. (2002). Discourse analysis and the study of policy making. European Political Science, 2(1), 61-65.
25. Hastings, A. (1998). Connecting linguistic structures and social practices: A discursive approach to social policy analysis. Journal of Social Policy, 27, 191-211.
26. Jackson, J. (2001). Truth, trust and medicine. Routledge: London.
27. Leehey, M. A., Munhoz, R. P., Lang, A. E., Brunberg, J. A., Grigsby, J., Greco, C., et al. (2003). The fragile X premutation presenting as essential tremor. Archives of Neurolology, 60, 117-121.
28. McConkie-Rosell, A., & DeVellis, B. M. (2000). Threat to parental role: A possible mechanism of altered self-concept related to carrier knowledge, Journal of Genetic Counseling, 9, 285-302.
29. McConkie-Rosell, A., & Spiridigliozzi, G. A. (2004). "Family matters": A conceptual framework for genetic testing in children. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 13, 9-29.
30. Maier, K. E. (1989) Pregnant women: Fetal containers or people with rights? Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 4, 8-20.
31. Majone, G. (1989). Evidence, argument, and persuasion in the policy process. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
32. National Society of Genetic Counsellors (1995). Resolutions ballot: Prenatal and childhood testing for adult-onset disorders. Wallingford, PA: National Society of Genetic Counselors.
33. NIH (2004) Genetics home reference. Retrieved April 2004, from http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/ghr/glossary/
34. O'Neill, O. (2002). Autonomy and trust in bioethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
35. Parsons, E., & Atkinson, P. (1992). Lay constructions of genetic risk. Sociology of Health and Illness, 14, 437-455.
36. Pomerantz, A. (1980). Telling my side: 'Limited access' as a 'fishing device.' Sociological Inquiry, 50, 186-198.
37. Procter, A. M., Clarke, A. J., & Harper, P. S. (1999). Survey of genetic testing in childhood. Poster presentation, British Human Genetics Conference, University of York, 27-29 September 1999.
38. Purkis, J. (2003). The quintessential female act?: Learning about birth. In S. Earle & G. Letherby (Eds.), Gender, identity and reproduction: Social perspectives (pp. 103-120). Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke.
39. Rhodes, R. (1998). Genetic links, family ties, and social bonds: rights and responsibilities in the face of genetic knowledge. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 23, 10-30.
40. Schild, S. (1966).The challenging opportunity for social workers in genetics. Social Work, 11, 22.
41. Sherwin, S. (1998). A relational approach to autonomy in health care. In S. Sherwin (Ed.), The politics of women's health: Exploring agency and autonomy (pp. 19-47). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
42. Takala, T., & Häyry, M. (2001) Genetic information, autonomy, and rights. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 22, 403-414.
43. Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
44. van Dijk, T. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 4, 249-283.
45. Wexler, N. S. (1992). The Tiresias complex: Huntington's disease as a paradigm of testing for late-onset disorders. The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology Journal, 6, 2820-2825.
46. Woodward, K. (1997). Motherhood: Meanings and myths. In K. Woodward (Ed.), Identity and Difference (pp. 239-297). London: Sage.