Cargando…
Why NIPT should be publicly funded
Asking pregnant women to (co)pay for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) out of pocket leads to unequal access across socioeconomic strata. To avoid these social justice issues, first-trimester prenatal screening should be publicly funded in countries such as the Netherlands, with universal coverag...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7656139/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32277019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106218 |
_version_ | 1783608319296929792 |
---|---|
author | Bunnik, Eline Maria Kater-Kuipers, Adriana Galjaard, Robert-Jan H de Beaufort, Inez |
author_facet | Bunnik, Eline Maria Kater-Kuipers, Adriana Galjaard, Robert-Jan H de Beaufort, Inez |
author_sort | Bunnik, Eline Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | Asking pregnant women to (co)pay for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) out of pocket leads to unequal access across socioeconomic strata. To avoid these social justice issues, first-trimester prenatal screening should be publicly funded in countries such as the Netherlands, with universal coverage healthcare systems that offer all other antenatal care services and screening programmes free of charge. In this reply, we offer three additional reasons for public funding of NIPT. First, NIPT may not primarily have medical utility for women and children, but rather offers relevant information and reproductive options, and thus serves important autonomy interests of women. Second, public funding of NIPT can be justified because it results in a reduction of collectively borne costs associated with care and support for children with chromosomal abnormalities. It is important to note that this is not an argument for individual women to take part in screening or to terminate an affected pregnancy. However, it is a legitimate argument in policy making regarding funding arrangements for screening programmes. Finally, public funding would help to amend current misunderstandings among pregnant women (eg, that they are not at risk), and thus to support informed consent for first-trimester prenatal screening. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7656139 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76561392020-11-17 Why NIPT should be publicly funded Bunnik, Eline Maria Kater-Kuipers, Adriana Galjaard, Robert-Jan H de Beaufort, Inez J Med Ethics Response Asking pregnant women to (co)pay for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) out of pocket leads to unequal access across socioeconomic strata. To avoid these social justice issues, first-trimester prenatal screening should be publicly funded in countries such as the Netherlands, with universal coverage healthcare systems that offer all other antenatal care services and screening programmes free of charge. In this reply, we offer three additional reasons for public funding of NIPT. First, NIPT may not primarily have medical utility for women and children, but rather offers relevant information and reproductive options, and thus serves important autonomy interests of women. Second, public funding of NIPT can be justified because it results in a reduction of collectively borne costs associated with care and support for children with chromosomal abnormalities. It is important to note that this is not an argument for individual women to take part in screening or to terminate an affected pregnancy. However, it is a legitimate argument in policy making regarding funding arrangements for screening programmes. Finally, public funding would help to amend current misunderstandings among pregnant women (eg, that they are not at risk), and thus to support informed consent for first-trimester prenatal screening. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11 2020-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7656139/ /pubmed/32277019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106218 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Response Bunnik, Eline Maria Kater-Kuipers, Adriana Galjaard, Robert-Jan H de Beaufort, Inez Why NIPT should be publicly funded |
title | Why NIPT should be publicly funded |
title_full | Why NIPT should be publicly funded |
title_fullStr | Why NIPT should be publicly funded |
title_full_unstemmed | Why NIPT should be publicly funded |
title_short | Why NIPT should be publicly funded |
title_sort | why nipt should be publicly funded |
topic | Response |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7656139/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32277019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106218 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bunnikelinemaria whyniptshouldbepubliclyfunded AT katerkuipersadriana whyniptshouldbepubliclyfunded AT galjaardrobertjanh whyniptshouldbepubliclyfunded AT debeaufortinez whyniptshouldbepubliclyfunded |