This article explores the boundaries of neighborhoods as subjectively constructed by 37 adolescents and 33 parents across four census-defined block groups in a Western city. We examine the degree of consensus among participants on the spatial boundaries of their neighborhoods, the stability of participants' subjectively constructed neighborhood definitions, and the overlap between subjectively constructed definitions and census block group and tract definitions. Through an analysis of qualitative interviews, we isolate four factors that appear to influence how participants define their neighborhood boundaries: physical and institutional characteristics of the neighborhood, its class, race, and ethnic composition, perceived criminal threats from within and outside the neighborhood, and symbolic neighborhood identities. These factors can operate to facilitate or compromise consensus and stability about neighborhood boundaries and identity. The study findings are exploratory but suggest several avenues for further investigation into how parents and adolescents construct neighborhood boundaries and the possible influences that subjective neighborhood definitions have on families.Neighborhood has long been recognized as a defining social context of American life (e.g.,

The ability to perform predictive genetic testing of children raises ethical concerns. Current guidelines support the screening of newborns for conditions in which early treatment reduces morbidity and mortality, and oppose most other predictive genetic screening and testing in childhood. Little is known, however, about parental attitudes. We conducted focus groups to gain information on the attitudes, beliefs, and concerns of parents about newborn screening and testing for both treatable and untreatable conditions that present in childhood. Respondents across racial groups support mandatory newborn screening for treatable conditions like phenylketonuria (PKU), citing lack of parental knowledge, and concerns about immature parental decision-makers. Parents do, however, want more information. Citing a variety of psychosocial concerns, respondents believe that parents should have access to predictive genetic testing for childhood onset conditions, even when there are no proven treatments. Respondents want this information to make reproductive and non-reproductive plans and decisions. Although respondents varied in their personal interest in testing, overwhelmingly they believed that the decisions belong to the parents. Professional guidelines that proscribe predictive testing for untreatable childhood onset conditions should be re-examined in light of consumer attitudes.

Objectives: To explore parental attitudes and beliefs about genetic testing of children for conditions that present throughout the life cycle. Methods: Twelve semi-structured focus groups with black and white parents were conducted. Results: Across racial groups, most respondents want access to genetic testing and believe that parents should be the final decision-makers. While most respondents believe it is important to share genetic information with relatives, white respondents want physicians to respect confidentiality absolutely, whereas some black respondents accept physician disclosures in specific situations. Conclusions: Professional policy statements are restrictive about access to predictive genetic testing of children. This conflicts with parental attitudes about who should have decisional authority. While there is consensus among respondents that genetic information should be shared with relatives, respondents disagree as to who should be responsible for disclosure, and when professionals should breach patient confidentiality.

No abstract