'It's something for you both to think about': Choice and decision making in nuchal translucency screening for Down's syndrome

Sociology of Health and Illness

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 511-530

  Pilnick, Alison ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Antenatal screening; Conversation analysis; Informed choice

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DOWN SYNDROME; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PARENT; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREGNANCY; TEACHING HOSPITAL; UNITED KINGDOM;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; DOWN SYNDROME; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HOSPITALS, TEACHING; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PARENTS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, FIRST; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 42449092777     PISSN: 01419889     EISSN: 14679566     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01071.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Anspach, R. (1993) Deciding Who Lives: Fateful Choices in the Intensive Care Nursery. Berkeley : University of California Press.
2. Atkinson, P. Heritage, J. (1984) (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
3. Beeson, D. (1984) Technological rhythms in pregnancy. In Duster, T. Garrelt, K. (eds) Cultural Perspectives on Biological Knowledge. Norwood, NJ : Ablex.
4. Bredmar, M. Linell, P. (1999) Reconfirming normality: the constitution of reassurance in talks between midwives and expectant mothers. In Sarangi, S. Roberts, C. (eds) Talk, Work and Institutions: Discourse in Medical, Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin : Mouton De Gruyer.
5. Cullen, C. (1999) Contextualism in intellectual disability research: the case of choice behaviour, Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 43, 437 44.
6. Drew, P. Heritage, J. (1992) Analyzing talk at work: an introduction. In Drew, P. Heritage, J. (eds) Talk at work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
7. Greatbatch, D. Dingwall, R. (1999) Professional neutralism in family mediation. In Sarangi, S. Roberts, C. (eds) Talk, Work and Institutions: Discourse in Medical, Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin : Mouton De Gruyer.
8. Heritage, J. Greatbatch, D. (1991) On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews. In Boden, D. Zimmerman, D. (eds) Talk and Social Structure: Studies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis. Cambridge : Polity Press.
9. Heyman, B., Hundt, G., Sandall, J., Spencer, K., Williams, C., Grellier, R. Pitson, L. (2006) On being at higher risk: a qualitative study of prenatal screening for chromosomal anomalies, Social Science and Medicine, 62, 10, 2360 72.
10. Human Genetics Commission (2006) Making Babies: Reproductive Decisions and Genetic Technologies. London : Human Genetics Commission.
11. Kirkham, M. (ed.) (2004) Informed Choice in Maternity Care. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan.
12. Lane, B., Challen, K., Harris, H. Harris, R. (2001) Existence and quality of written antenatal screening policies in the United Kingdom: postal survey, British Medical Journal, 322, 22 3.
13. Levy, V. (2004) How midwives used protective steering to facilitate informed choice in pregnancy. In Kirkham, M. (ed.) Informed Choice in Maternity Care. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan.
14. Lewando-Hundt, G., Green, J., Sandall, J., Hirst, J., Ahmed, S. Hewison, J. (2006) Navigating the troubled waters of prenatal testing decisions. In Webster, A. (ed.) New Technologies in Healthcare: Challenge, Change and Innovation. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan.
15. Linell, P. Bredmar, M. (1996) Reconstructing topical sensitivity: aspects of face-work in talks between midwives and expectant mothers, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29, 347 79.
16. Marteau, T.M. (1995) Towards informed decisions about prenatal testing: a review, Prenatal Diagnosis, 15, 1215 26.
17. Marteau, T.M., Slack, J., Kidd, J. Shaw, R.W. (1992) Presenting a routine screening test in antenatal care: practice observed. Public Health, 106, 131 41.
18. Maynard, D.W. Schaeffer, N.C. (2002) Opening and closing the gate: the work of optimism in recruiting survey respondents. In Maynard, D.W., Steenstra, H.H., Schaeffer, N.C. van der Zouwen, J. (eds) Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview. New York : Wiley.
19. Meier, C., Huang, T., Wyatt, P. Summers, A. (2002) Accuracy of expected risk of Down Syndrome using the second-trimester triple test, Clinical Chemistry, 48, 653 5.
20. New York Times, December 15 2002. A diagnosis is not a name.
21. Nicolaides, K., Azar, G. Byrne, D. et al 1992) Fetal nuchal translucency: ultrasound screening for chromosomal defects in first trimester of pregnancy, British Medical Journal, 304, 867 9.
22. Pandya, P., Snijders, R., Johnson, S. et al 1995) Screening for fetal trisomies by maternal age and fetal nuchal translucency thickness at 10 to 14 weeks of gestation, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 102, 957 62.
23. Pilnick, A. (1999) 'Patient counselling' by pharmacists: advice, information and instruction? The Sociological Quarterly, 40, 4, 613 22.
24. Pilnick, A. (2004) 'It's just one of the best tests we've got at the moment': the presentation of nuchal translucency screening for fetal abnormality in pregnancy, Discourse and Society, 15, 4, 451 65.
25. Pilnick, A, Fraser, D. James, D. (2004) Presenting and discussing nuchal translucency screening for fetal abnormality in the UK, Midwifery, 20, 82 93.
26. Press, N. Browner, C.H. (1997) Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis, Social Science and Medicine, 45, 7, 979 89.
27. Rapp, R. (2000) Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: the social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York : Routledge.
28. Rothman, B.K. (1998) The Tentative Pregnancy: Prenatal Diagnosis and the Future of Motherhood. London : Pandora.
29. Royal College of Obstetricians Gynaecologists (1997) Fetal Abnormalities: Guidelines for Screening, Diagnosis and Management. London : RCOG.
30. Sarangi, S. Clarke, A. (2002) Constructing an account by contrast in counselling for childhood genetic testing, Social Science and Medicine, 54, 295 308.
31. Searle J. (1997) Routine antenatal screening: not a case of informed choice, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 21, 3, 268 74.
32. Smith, D.K., Shaw, R.W. Marteau, T.M. (1994) Informed consent to undergo serum screening for Down's syndrome: the gap between policy and practice, British Medical Journal, 309, 776.
33. Spencer, K., Spencer, C.E., Power, M., Dawson, C. Nicolaides, K.H. (2003) Screening for chromosomal abnormalities in the first trimester using ultrasound and maternal serum biochemistry in a one-stop clinic: a review of three years prospective experience, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 110, 3, 281 6.
34. Wareing, D. Newell, C. (2002) Responsible choice: the choice between no choice, Discourse and Society, 17, 4, 419 34.
35. Williams, C., Alderson, P. Farsides, B. (2002) What constitutes 'balanced information' in the practitioners' portrayals of Down's syndrome? Midwifery, 18, 230 7.
36. Williams, C., Sandall, J., Lewando-Hundt, G., Heyman, B., Spencer, K. Grellier, R. (2005) Women as moral pioneers? Experiences of first trimester antenatal screening, Social Science and Medicine, 61, 9, 1983 92.
37. Williamson-North, H., Abramsky, L., Veazey, H. Chapple, J. (2005) Screening for Chromosomal Anomalies in London: Second Annual Report. http://www.screening.nhs.uk/downs/london_ascal.doc (Accessed 3rd September 2007).