Genetic screening and democracy: Lessons from debating genetic screening criteria in the Netherlands

被引:22
作者
Carla Geertruida van El
Toine Pieters
Martina Cornel
机构
[1] Section Community Genetics, Department of Clinical Genetics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, 1081 BT Amsterdam
[2] Department of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Center, 1081 BT Amsterdam
[3] Centre for Society and Genomics, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen
[4] Centre for Medical Systems Biology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden
[5] Descartes Centre for the History of the Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht
关键词
Democracy; Genetic screening; Prenatal screening; Public debate; Screening criteria;
D O I
10.1007/s12687-011-0063-z
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Recent decades have witnessed increasing possibilities for genetic testing and screening. In clinical genetics, the doctor's office defined a secluded space for discussion of sensitive reproductive options in cases of elevated risk for genetic disorders in individuals or their offspring. When prenatal screening for all pregnant women became conceivable, the potential increase in scale made social and ethical concerns relevant for the whole of society. Whereas genetic testing in clinical genetic practice was widely accepted, prenatal screening at a population level met with unease. Concerns were raised regarding social pressure to screen: the sum of individual choice might result in a 'collective eugenics'. The government's involvement also raised suspicion: actively offering screening evoked associations with eugenic population policies from the first half of the 20th century. By reconstructing elements of policy and public debate on prenatal screening in the Netherlands from the past 30 years, this article discusses how the government has gradually changed its role in balancing the interest of the individual and the collective on genetic reproductive issues. Against a background of increasing knowledge about and demand for prenatal screening among the population, governmental policy changed from focusing on protection by banning screening toward facilitating screening in a careful and ethically sound way by providing adequate information, decision aids and quality assessment instruments. In the meanwhile, invigorating democracy in public debate may entail discussing concepts of 'the good life' in relation to living with or without impairments and dealing with genetic information about oneself or one's offspring. © The Author(s) 2011.
引用
收藏
页码:79 / 89
页数:10
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]  
Borry P., Cornel M.C., Howard H.C., Where are you going, where have you been: A recent history of the direct-to-consumer genetic testing market, J Comm Genet, 2010, pp. 101-106, (2010)
[2]  
Brief Van Mevr B.O.S.K., Kruidenier-Bron K.A., Voorzitter BOSK aan de Staatssecretaris van Welzijn, (1992)
[3]  
Chiu R.W.K., Akolekar R., Zheng Y.W.L., Et al., Non-invasive prenatal assessment of trisomy 21 by multiplexed maternal plasma DNA sequencing: Large scale validity study, Br Med J, 342, (2011)
[4]  
Verloskundig Vademecum 2003, (2003)
[5]  
On genetic testing and screening for health care purposes, Recommendation. Council of Europe. No. R (92), (1992)
[6]  
De Jong A., Dondorp W.J., De Die-Smulders C.E.M., Frints S.G.M., De Wert G.M.W.R., Non-invasive prenatal testing: Ethical issues explored, Eur J Hum Genet, 18, pp. 272-277, (2010)
[7]  
De Wert G.M.W.R., Engel G.L., Erfelijkheidsadvisering als instrument van bevolkingseugenetica? Enkele kanttekeningen bij de nota 'Preventie aangeboren afwijkingen, Med Contact, 43, pp. 843-845, (1988)
[8]  
Fan C., Quake S.R., In principle method for noninvasive determination of the fetal genome, Nature Precedings., (2010)
[9]  
Greely H.T., Get ready for the flood of fetal gene screening, Nature, 469, pp. 289-291, (2011)
[10]  
Hamerlynck J.V.Th.H., Knuist M., Gezondheidsraadadvies 'kans-bepalende screening op Downsyndroom voor alle vrouwen' onvoldoende overdacht, Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd, 145, pp. 2016-2019, (2001)