preconception expanded carrier screening
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

17
(FIVE YEARS 9)

H-INDEX

5
(FIVE YEARS 1)

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e056869
Author(s):  
Sofia Morberg Jämterud ◽  
Anke Snoek ◽  
I M van Langen ◽  
Marian Verkerk ◽  
Kristin Zeiler

ObjectiveBetween 2016 and 2017, a population-based preconception expanded carrier screening (PECS) test was developed in the Netherlands during a pilot study. It was subsequently made possible in mid-2018 for couples to ask to have such a PECS test from specially trained general practitioners (GPs). Research has described GPs as crucial in offering PECS tests, but little is known about the GPs’ views on PECS and their experiences of providing this test. This article presents a thematic analysis of the PECS practice from the perspective of GPs and a bioethical discussion of the empirical results.DesignEmpirical bioethics. A thematic analysis of qualitative semi-structured interviews was conducted, and is combined with an ethical/philosophical discussion.SettingThe Netherlands.Participants7 Dutch GPs in the Netherlands, interviewed in 2019–2020.ResultsTwo themes were identified in the thematic analysis: ‘Choice and its complexity’ and ‘PECS as prompting existential concerns’. The empirical bioethics discussion showed that the first theme highlights that several areas coshape the complexity of choice on PECS, and the need for shared relational autonomous decision-making on these areas within the couple. The second theme highlights that it is not possible to analyse the existential issues raised by PECS solely on the level of the couple or family. A societal level must be included, since these levels affect each other. We refer to this as ‘entangled existential genetics’.ConclusionThe empirical bioethical analysis leads us to present two practical implications. These are: (1) training of GPs who are to offer PECS should cover shared relational autonomous decision-making within the couple and (2) more attention should be given to existential issues evoked by genetic considerations, also during the education of GPs and in bioethical discussions around PECS.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liya Rabkina ◽  
Amy Swanson ◽  
Sharon Aufox ◽  
Lauren Propst ◽  
Morris Fiddler ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Thirsa Conijn ◽  
Ivy van Dijke ◽  
Lotte Haverman ◽  
Phillis Lakeman ◽  
Frits A Wijburg ◽  
...  

AbstractPreconception expanded carrier screening (ECS) enables prospective parents to assess their risk of having a child with an autosomal recessive disorder. Knowledge on motivations, feelings, and considerations people have towards the offer and use of ECS is limited. To enrich the public and professional discussion on ECS implementation, this study explored the perspectives towards various aspects of ECS in seven focus groups compromising first- and second-degree relatives of MPS III patients (N=9, N=4, N=5, N=5) and members of the general Dutch population (N=6, N=7, N=5). The focus groups were audio recorded and the transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to identify themes. Both relatives of MPS III patients and participants from the general population supported offering ECS, in particular for severe, childhood-onset disorders. Important barriers identified for ECS were a lack of genetic knowledge and a perceived lack of personal relevance and awareness, as well as out-of-pocket costs of testing. The majority of participants would prefer full disclosure of individual test results instead of couple-based test results. Moreover, offering people a choice for the way of reporting was proposed. All participants agreed that more efforts, for example by governmental campaigns, should be made to increase awareness on the availability, potentials, and limitations of ECS. Educating prospective parents about ECS is essential for increasing awareness and informed decision making. This study provides valuable insights that can be used by governments and public health authorities when considering implementation of preconception ECS.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido de Wert ◽  
Sanne van der Hout ◽  
Mariëtte Goddijn ◽  
Rita Vassena ◽  
Lucy Frith ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1331-1340
Author(s):  
Stephanie C. M. Nijmeijer ◽  
Thirsa Conijn ◽  
Phillis Lakeman ◽  
Lidewij Henneman ◽  
Frits A. Wijburg ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amal Matar ◽  
Anna T. Höglund ◽  
Pär Segerdahl ◽  
Ulrik Kihlbom

Abstract Background Preconception Expanded Carrier Screening (ECS) is a genetic test offered to a general population or to couples who have no known risk of recessive and X-linked genetic diseases and are interested in becoming parents. A test may screen for carrier status of several autosomal recessive diseases at one go. Such a program has been piloted in the Netherlands and may become a reality in more European countries in the future. The ethical rationale for such tests is that they enhance reproductive autonomy. The dominant conception of autonomy is individual-based. However, at the clinic, people deciding on preconception ECS will be counselled together and are expected to make a joint decision, as a couple. The aim of the present study was to develop an understanding of autonomous decisions made by couples in the context of reproductive technologies in general and of preconception ECS in particular. Further, to shed light on what occurs in reproductive clinics and suggest concrete implications for healthcare professionals. Main text Based on the shift in emphasis from individual autonomy to relational autonomy, a notion of couple autonomy was suggested and some features of this concept were outlined. First, that both partners are individually autonomous and that the decision is reached through a communicative process. In this process each partner should feel free to express his or her concerns and preferences, so no one partner dominates the discussion. Further, there should be adequate time for the couple to negotiate possible differences and conclude that the decision is right for them. The final decision should be reached through consensus of both partners without coercion, manipulation or miscommunication. Through concrete examples, the suggested notion of couple autonomy was applied to diverse clinical situations. Conclusions A notion of couple autonomy can be fruitful for healthcare professionals by structuring their attention to and support of a couple who is required to make an autonomous joint decision concerning preconception ECS. A normative implication for healthcare staff is to allow the necessary time for decision-making and to promote a dialogue that can increase the power of the weaker part in a relationship.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document