Cargando…

Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)

Informed consent is a key condition for prenatal screening programmes to reach their aim of promoting reproductive autonomy. Reaching this aim is currently being challenged with the introduction of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in first‐trimester prenatal screening programmes: amongst others...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kater‐Kuipers, Adriana, de Beaufort, Inez D., Galjaard, Robert‐Jan H., Bunnik, Eline M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7586798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32621525
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12760
_version_ 1783600065117421568
author Kater‐Kuipers, Adriana
de Beaufort, Inez D.
Galjaard, Robert‐Jan H.
Bunnik, Eline M.
author_facet Kater‐Kuipers, Adriana
de Beaufort, Inez D.
Galjaard, Robert‐Jan H.
Bunnik, Eline M.
author_sort Kater‐Kuipers, Adriana
collection PubMed
description Informed consent is a key condition for prenatal screening programmes to reach their aim of promoting reproductive autonomy. Reaching this aim is currently being challenged with the introduction of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in first‐trimester prenatal screening programmes: amongst others its procedural ease—it only requires a blood draw and reaches high levels of reliability—might hinder women’s understanding that they should make a personal, informed decision about screening. We offer arguments for a renewed recognition and use of informed consent compared to informed choice, and for a focus on value‐consistent choices and personalized informational preferences. We argue for a three‐step counselling model in which three decision moments are distinguished and differently addressed: (1) professionals explore women’s values concerning whether and why they wish to know whether their baby has a genetic disorder; (2) women receive layered medical‐technical information and are asked to make a decision about screening; (3) during post‐test counselling, women are supported in decision‐making about the continuation or termination of their pregnancy. This model might also be applicable in other fields of genetic (pre‐test) counselling, where techniques for expanding genome analysis and burdensome test‐outcomes challenge counselling of patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7586798
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75867982020-10-30 Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) Kater‐Kuipers, Adriana de Beaufort, Inez D. Galjaard, Robert‐Jan H. Bunnik, Eline M. Bioethics Original Articles Informed consent is a key condition for prenatal screening programmes to reach their aim of promoting reproductive autonomy. Reaching this aim is currently being challenged with the introduction of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in first‐trimester prenatal screening programmes: amongst others its procedural ease—it only requires a blood draw and reaches high levels of reliability—might hinder women’s understanding that they should make a personal, informed decision about screening. We offer arguments for a renewed recognition and use of informed consent compared to informed choice, and for a focus on value‐consistent choices and personalized informational preferences. We argue for a three‐step counselling model in which three decision moments are distinguished and differently addressed: (1) professionals explore women’s values concerning whether and why they wish to know whether their baby has a genetic disorder; (2) women receive layered medical‐technical information and are asked to make a decision about screening; (3) during post‐test counselling, women are supported in decision‐making about the continuation or termination of their pregnancy. This model might also be applicable in other fields of genetic (pre‐test) counselling, where techniques for expanding genome analysis and burdensome test‐outcomes challenge counselling of patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-07-04 2020-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7586798/ /pubmed/32621525 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12760 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Bioethics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kater‐Kuipers, Adriana
de Beaufort, Inez D.
Galjaard, Robert‐Jan H.
Bunnik, Eline M.
Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)
title Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)
title_full Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)
title_fullStr Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)
title_full_unstemmed Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)
title_short Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)
title_sort rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: an ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non‐invasive prenatal testing (nipt)
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7586798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32621525
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12760
work_keys_str_mv AT katerkuipersadriana rethinkingcounsellinginprenatalscreeninganethicalanalysisofinformedconsentinthecontextofnoninvasiveprenataltestingnipt
AT debeaufortinezd rethinkingcounsellinginprenatalscreeninganethicalanalysisofinformedconsentinthecontextofnoninvasiveprenataltestingnipt
AT galjaardrobertjanh rethinkingcounsellinginprenatalscreeninganethicalanalysisofinformedconsentinthecontextofnoninvasiveprenataltestingnipt
AT bunnikelinem rethinkingcounsellinginprenatalscreeninganethicalanalysisofinformedconsentinthecontextofnoninvasiveprenataltestingnipt