In "Implementing Expanded Prenatal Genetic Testing: Should Parents Have Access to Any and All Fetal Genetic Information?," Bayefsky and Berkman argue in favor of establishing three categorie...

Bayefsky and Berkman argue in favor of evidence-based policy development for expanded prenatal genetic testing. They propose to identify what kinds of information pregnant persons, their par...

Background Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) provides important benefits yet raises ethical concerns. We surveyed Canadian pregnant women and their partners to explore their views regarding pressure to test and terminate a pregnancy, as well as other societal impacts that may result from the routinization of NIPT.Methods A questionnaire was offered (March 2015 to July 2016) to pregnant women and their partners at five healthcare facilities in four Canadian provinces.Results 882 pregnant women and 395 partners completed the survey. 64% of women (...) anticipated feeling no pressure to take the test if it were offered routinely, and 39% were not concerned about routinization leading to increased pressure to terminate a pregnancy of a fetus with Down Syndrome. Regarding other social concerns possibly resulting from routinization, pregnant women were most concerned regarding a reduction in resources available for people with Down Syndrome and their families and least concerned regarding a decrease in the population of people with Down Syndrome.Conclusions Our findings reflect the concerns expressed by pregnant women and their partners, both personal (pressure to test, pressure to terminate) and societal (e.g., regarding potential negative impact on people with disabilities and their families). Even if most women were not concerned about feeling pressured to test due to NIPT routinization, a large minority express concerns that should not be taken lightly. Moreover, a majority of respondents were concerned regarding pressure to terminate pregnancies due to NIPT routinization as well as regarding most societal impacts they were queried on, especially the possible future reduction in resources available for people with DS and their families. Canadian policy-makers should consider these potential negative ramifications of NIPT and ensure that appropriate social policies accompany its implementation. (shrink)

Background: Informed consent for genetic tests is a well-established practice. It should be based on good quality information and in keeping with the patient’s values. Existing informed consent assessment tools assess knowledge and values. Nevertheless, there is no consensus on what specific elements need to be discussed or considered in the consent process for genetic tests.Methods: We performed a systematic review to identify all factors involved in the decision-making and consent process about genetic testing, from the perspective of patients. Through (...) public databases, we identified studies reporting factors that influence the decision to accept or decline genetic testing. Studies were included if they reported the perspective of patients or at-risk individuals. All articles were thematically coded.Results: 1989 articles were reviewed: 70 met inclusion criteria and 12 additional articles were identified through the references of included studies. Coding of the 82 articles led to the identification of 45 factors involved in decision-making and consent, which were initially divided into three domains: in favor of, against or with an undetermined influence on genetic testing. Each factor was also divided into three subdomains relating to the informed choice concept: knowledge, values or other. The factors in the “other” subdomain were all related to the context of testing (e.g. timing, cost, influence of family members, etc), and were present in all three domains.Conclusions: We describe the network of factors contributing to decision-making and consent process and identify the context of genetic testing as a third component to influence this process. Future studies should consider the evaluation of contextual factors as an important and relevant component of the consent and decision-making process about genetic tests. Based on these results, we plan to develop and test a more comprehensive tool to assess informed consent for genetic testing. (shrink)

BackgroundThe clinical introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidies is currently transforming the landscape of prenatal screening in many countries. Since it is noninvasive, safe and allows the early detection of abnormalities, NIPT expanded rapidly and the test is currently commercially available in most of the world. As NIPT is being introduced globally, its clinical implementation should consider various challenges, including the role of the surrounding social and cultural contexts. We conducted a qualitative study with healthcare professionals in Lebanon (...) and Quebec as case studies, to highlight the relevance of cultural contexts and to explore the concerns that should be taken into account for an ethical implementation of NIPT.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 healthcare professionals (HCPs), 10 from each country, practicing in the field of prenatal screening and follow up diagnostic testing, including obstetricians and gynecologists, nurses, medical geneticists and, genetic counselors. We aimed to 1) explore HCPs’ perceptions and views regarding issues raised by NIPT and 2) to shed light on ways in which the introduction of the same technology (NIPT) in two different contexts (Lebanon and Quebec) raises common and different challenges that are influenced by the cultural norms and legal policies in place.ResultsWe identified challenges to the ethical implementation of NIPT. Some are common to both contexts, including financial/economic, social, and organizational/ educational challenges. Others are specific to each context. For example, challenges for Lebanon include abortion policy and financial profit, and in Quebec challenges include lobbying by Disability rights associations and geographical access to NIPT.ConclusionsOur findings highlight the need to consider specific issues related to various cultural contexts when developing frameworks that can guide an ethically sound implementation of NIPT. Further, they show that healthcare professional education and training remain paramount in order to provide NIPT counseling in a way that supports pregnant women and couples’ choice. (shrink)

Harvey and Gurvir’s Law is a bill proposed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario (Canada) to reduce stigma and bias associated with Down syndrome, by developing and disseminating quality information about Down syndrome in the context of prenatal testing.

I agree with Dive et al. (2023) “that generating and reporting information about genetic variants beyond the scope of the screening program usually lacks clinical, and perhaps personal, utility” an...

In “Non-invasive prenatal testing for ‘non-medical’ traits: Ensuring consistency in ethical decision-making,” Bowman-Smart et al. (2023) lay out arguments both for and against the potential use of...

L’implantation d’une nouvelle technologie est une étape de la translation d’une découverte vers une application clinique. De nombreux modèles ont été proposés pour étudier une telle translation ; celui de Goering, Holland et Kelley met de l’avant des priorités qui résonnent avec la bioéthique. Nous proposons l’application d’un outil issu des sciences de l’implantation, le Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), pour identifier les enjeux éthiques d’une nouvelle technologie. Cet outil est conçu pour identifier les barrières et facilitateurs de l’implantation (...) d’une technologie, et par le fait même s’inscrit dans le modèle de la recherche translationnelle. Nous prenons en exemple le test génomique prénatal non invasif (TGPNI). Ce test est offert dans certaines provinces du Canada en deuxième intention pour les personnes enceintes ayant une haute probabilité d’avoir un foetus avec une aneuploïdie. Des innovations potentielles du TGPNI sont de l’offrir comme test de première intention et d’étendre le nombre de conditions génétiques dépistées. Nous proposons donc d’utiliser le CFIR pour identifier les enjeux éthiques qui découlent des barrières et facilitateurs de ces innovations du TGPNI. En identifiant les barrières et facilitateurs de l’implantation d’une technologie, cet outil permet aux bioéthiciens de recourir à un outil éprouvé d’une autre discipline pour étudier des enjeux éthiques. Les bioéthiciens peuvent alors se tourner vers leurs outils traditionnels pour identifier les enjeux éthiques que soulèvent ces éléments. Notre proposition est un exemple parmi d’autres possibles de ce que cette approche peut accomplir : identifier d’une manière innovatrice des enjeux éthiques d’une nouvelle technologie. (shrink)