Re-examining the Ethics of Genetic Counselling in the Genomic Era

Abstract

Respect for patient autonomy has served as the dominant ethical principle of genetic counselling, but as we move into a genomic era, it is time to actively reexamine the role that this principle plays in genetic counselling practice. In this paper, we argue that the field of genetic counselling should move away from its emphasis on patient autonomy and toward the incorporation of a more balanced set of principles that allows counsellors to offer clear guidance about how best to obtain or use genetic information. We begin with a brief history of how respect for patient autonomy gained such emphasis in the field and how it has taken on various manifestations over time, including the problematic concept of nondirectiveness. After acknowledging the field's preliminary move away from nondirectiveness, we turn to a series of arguments about why the continued dominance of patient autonomy has become untenable given the arrival of the genomic era. To conclude, we describe how a more complete set of bioethical principles can be adapted and used by genetic counsellors to strengthen their practice without undermining patient autonomy.

Uptake and acceptability of a mainstreaming model of hereditary cancer multigene panel testing among patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer

“…While future work needs to determine if this model performs similarly for unaffected patients, a distinctive feature of this study was our focus on cancer patients for whom the pre-test decision is less preference-sensitive given its treatment implications, 39 and whose openness to testing and subsequent satisfaction may be influenced by the potential access to additional therapeutic options. Opportunities exist for utilizing such a mainstreaming model among cancer patients as a catalyst for “cascade” testing of at-risk relatives, which would have a substantial impact on the rate of detection of all individuals with cancer-predisposing PV in the US population.…”

Heterogeneous attitudinal profiles towards gene editing: Evidence from latent class analysis

“…Divisions of opinion and groups of individuals that hold different configurations of attitudes towards gene editing may also have important consequences for future medical practice, for example in precision medicine applications (DuBois et al, 2021) and genetic counselling. Discussions of best practice in genetic counselling have highlighted the need for evidence based practices (Bowles Biesecker and Marteau, 1999) and how practice needs to change in response to the growing number of gene-based healthcare tools (Schupmann et al, 2020). Genetic counselling also makes use of a non-directive approach (i.e.…”

A principled approach to bioethical regulation of genetic counseling: mapping the bioethical problems of genetic counseling and models for their solution

“…al., 2014). Однако недирективный характер консультирования не должен пониматься ни как не-вмешательство, ни как необходимость предлагать пациенту на выбор все возрастающее число опций (Schupmann et. al., 2020).…”