In their article, Dees and Kwon (2013) describe the case of newborn screening for Krabbe disease and argue compellingly that a mandatory newborn screening program for this disease is problematic in several respects. Therefore, they submit, testing on Krabbe disease should only be offered on a voluntary basis, under a research protocol. In my opinion, Dees and Kwon are correct to point out the problematic character of a mandatory screening program for Krabbe disease. Their move toward a research paradigm is (...) however problematic. More specific, their proposal presents problems for the role of informed consent in Krabbe testing. (shrink)

Debates about expanding newborn screening with whole genome sequencing are fueled by data about public perception, public opinion, and the positions taken by public advocates and advocacy groups. One form of evidence that merits attention as we consider possible uses of whole‐genome sequencing during the newborn period is parents’ (and children's) diverse experiences with existing expanded screening protocols. What do we know about this experience base? And what implications might these data have for decisions about how we use whole genome (...) sequencing and how we assess its impact in the future? Although the broader literature on genetic susceptibility testing suggests that testing usually does not have adverse effects on children's psychosocial well‐being, certain newborn screening results have been demonstrated to cause distress, alter behavior, and even to influence the formation of new parental and family identities. (shrink)

Hom and colleagues (2016) argue in favor of allowing religious exemptions to congenital critical heart disease (CCHD) newborn screening, but the logic of their position is at odds with the moral ju...