Unambiguous test results or individual independence? The role of clients and families in predictive BRCA-testing in the Netherlands compared to the USA

Social Science and Medicine

Volumn 72, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1793-1801

  Boenink, Marianne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Ambiguity; BRCA testing; Client; DNA diagnostics; Family relations; Hereditary breast ovarian cancer; The Netherlands; USA; Women

Indexed keywords

DNA; FAMILY STRUCTURE; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETICS; HEALTH GEOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; TESTING METHOD;

ARTICLE; BRCA GENE; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL GENETICIST; CLINICAL GENETICS; FAMILY ATTITUDE; FAMILY HISTORY; FAMILY RELATION; GENE; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC RISK; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; NETHERLANDS; OVARY CANCER; PATIENT AUTONOMY; PEDIGREE ANALYSIS; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RELATIVE; UNITED STATES;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; FAMILY RELATIONS; FEMALE; GENES, BRCA1; GENES, BRCA2; GENETIC TESTING; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL VALUES; UNITED STATES;

NETHERLANDS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 79958762779     PISSN: 02779536     EISSN: 18735347     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.06.011     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Akrich M. The description of technical objects. Shaping technology/building society 1992, 205-224. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. W.E. Bijker, J. Law (Eds.).
2. Ingebouwde normen. Medische technieken doorgelicht 2001, Van der Wees, Utrecht. M. Berg, A. Mol (Eds.).
3. Boenink M. Genetic diagnostics for hereditary breast cancer - displacement of uncertainty and responsibility. Genetics from laboratory to society 2008, 37-63. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. G.H.D. Vries, K. Horstman (Eds.).
4. Bourret P. BRCA patients and clinical collectives: new configurations of action in cancer genetics practices. Social Studies of Science 2005, 35(1):41-68.
5. Cancer Genomics Center Genen, fout DNA en kanker 2005, Over kankeronderzoek, gendiagnostiek, erfelijkheidstesten en doelgerichte therapieën. Utrecht.
6. Chadwick R., Levitt M., Shickle D. The right to know and the right not to know 1997, Averbury, Aldershot.
7. Clarke A. Commentary. Journal of Medical Ethics 2003, 29:80-82.
8. Couch F.J., DeShano M.L., Blackwood A., Calzone K., Stopfer J., Campeau L., et al. BRCA1 mutations in women attending clinics that evaluate the risk of breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 2009, 336(20):1409-1415.
9. DeMarco T.A., Peshkin B.N., Brogan B.M. Across the spectrum: case studies in genetic counseling for breast and ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling 2001, 10(5):379-395.
10. Featherstone K., Atkinson P., Bharadwaj A., Clarke A. Risky relations: family, kinship and the new genetics 2006, Berg, Oxford.
11. Hallowell N., Foster C., Ardern-Jones A., Murday V., Watson M., Eeles R. Genetic testing for women previously diagnosed with breast/ovarian cancer: examining the impact of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation searching. Genetic Testing 2002, 6(2):79-87.
12. Hallowell N., Foster C., Eeles R., Ardern-Jones A., Murday V., Watson M. Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information. Journal of Medical Ethics 2003, 29:74-83.
13. Hallowell N., Watson M. Author's reply. Journal of Medical Ethics 2003, 29:82-83.
14. Horstman K. Chemical analysis of urine for life insurance: the construction of reliability. Science, Technology, & Human Values 1997, 22(1):57-78.
15. Horstman K. Technology and the management of trust in insurance medicine. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000, 21:39-61.
16. Horstman K., Smand C. Detecting familiar hypercholesterolemia: escaping the family history?. Genetics form laboratory to society. Societal learning as an alternative to regulation 2008, 90-117. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. G. de Vries, K. Horstman (Eds.).
17. Huibers A.K., Spijker A.v.t. The autonomy paradox: predictive genetic testing and autonomy: three essential problems. Patient Education and Counseling 1998, 35:53-62.
18. Husted J. Autonomy and a right not to know. The right to know and the right not to know 1997, 55-68. Avebury, Aldershott. R. Chadwick, M. Levitt, D. Shickle (Eds.).
19. Koch L., Stemerding D. The sociology of entrenchment: a cystic fibrosis test for everyone?. Social Science & Medicine 1994, 39:1211-1220.
20. Konrad M. Narrating the new predictive genetics. Ethics, ethnography and science 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
21. Latour B. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society 1987, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
22. Laurie G.T. In defence of ignorance: genetic information and the right not to know. European Journal of Health Law 1999, 6:119-132.
23. Löwy I., Gaudillière J.P. Localizing the global: testing for hereditary risks of breast cancer. Science, Technology & Human Values 2008, 33(3):299-325.
24. Lynch H.T., Watson P., Tinley S., Snyder C., Durham C., Lynch J., et al. An update on DNA-based BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic counseling in hereditary breast cancer. Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics 1999, 109(2):91-98.
25. Mol A. What diagnostic devices do: the case of blood sugar measurement. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000, 21:9-22.
26. Mol A. The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice 2002, Duke University Press, Durham/London.
27. Nelis A. DNA-diagnostiek in Nederland. Een regime-analyse van de ontwikkeling van de klinische genetica en DNA-diagnostische tests, 1970-1997 1998, Twente University Press, Enschede.
28. Nelson H.D., Hoyt Huffman L., Fu R., Harris E.L. Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: systematic evidence review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Annals of Internal Medicine 2005, 143(5):362-379.
29. Palladino P. Between knowledge and practice: on medical professionals, patients, and the making of the genetics of cancer. Social Studies of Science 2002, 32(1):137-165.
30. Parthasarathy S. Architectures of genetic medicine: comparing genetic testing for breast cancer in the USA and the UK. Social Studies of Science 2005, 35(1):5-40.
31. Parthasarathy S. Building genetic medicine. breast cancer, technology, and the comparative politics of health care 2007, MIT Press, Cambridge (Mass.).
32. Skene L. Patient's rights or family responsibilities?. Medical Law Review 1998, 6:1-41.
33. Stemerding D., Bourret P., Koch L. DNA diagnosis and the emergence of cancer genetics services in European health care. European Journal of Human Genetics 1998, 5(Suppl. 2):25-30.
34. Verbeek P.-P. What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency and design 2005, Penn State University Press, University Park (PA).
35. Genetics from laboratory to society 2008, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. G.H.D. Vries, K. Horstman (Eds.).