Genetic Testing for Susceptibility to Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Case Study of Clinical Decision-Making in Medical Genetics

Dissertation, University of Washington (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This dissertation provides the foundation of a useful approach to clinical ethical judgment. The method of hypothetical paradigms is a case based approach to ethical reasoning that is justified by the requirements of coherence and wide reflective equilibrium. It operates by establishing a taxonomy of cases that are linked together by a common set of topics. The problems associated with genetic testing for susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer serve as an example of how the method of hypothetical paradigms works to solve clinical ethical dilemmas

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,709

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Cost-effectiveness of predictive genetic tests for familial breast and ovarian cancer.Nikki Breheny, Elizabeth Geelhoed, Jack Goldblatt & Peter O'Leary - 2005 - Genomics, Society and Policy 1 (2):1-13.
Experiential Knowledge, Moral Agency and Genetic Testing for Hereditary Breast/Ovarian Cancer.Lorraine D'agincourt-Canning - 2003 - Dissertation, The University of British Columbia (Canada)
Exploring the requirements for a decision aid on familial breast cancer in the UK context: a qualitative study with patients referred to a cancer genetics service.Rachel Iredale, Frances Rapport, Stephanie Sivell, Wendy Jones, Adrian Edwards, Jonathon Gray & Glyn Elwyn - 2008 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 14 (1):110-115.
Genetic Testing after Breast Cancer Diagnosis: Implications for Physician-Patient Communications.Nancy Berlinger - 2004 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 13 (4):417-419.
Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information * Commentary * Author's reply.N. Hallowell - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (2):74-79.
The medical decision-making process and the family: The case of breast cancer patients and their husbands.Roy Gilbar & Ora Gilbar - 2008 - Bioethics 23 (3):183-192.
Attitudes of Rhode Island primary care physicians toward the use of genetic testing for breast cancer.Frances M. Alexakos - unknown
Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information.Nina Hallowell, Claire Foster, Ros Eeles, A. Ardern-Jones, Veronica Murday & Maggie Watson - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (2):74-79.
Collective Fear, Individualized Risk: the social and cultural context of genetic testing for breast cancer.N. Press, J. R. Fishman & B. A. Koenig - 2000 - Nursing Ethics 7 (3):237-249.
Much more than a gene: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, reproductive choices and family life. [REVIEW]Catherine Dekeuwer & Simone Bateman - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (2):231-244.
Interactive patient decision aids for women facing genetic testing for familial breast cancer: a systematic web and literature review.Lisa Williams, Wendy Jones, Glyn Elwyn & Adrian Edwards - 2008 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 14 (1):70-74.
Social contract theory and just decision making: Lessons from genetic testing for the BRCA mutations.Bryn Williams-Jones & Michael M. Burgess - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (2):115-142.
Patient, physician and presentational influences on clinical decision making for breast cancer: results from a factorial experiment.John B. McKinlay, Risa B. Burns, Richard Durante, Henry A. Feldman, Karen M. Freund, Brooke S. Harrow, Julie T. Irish, Linda E. Kasten & Mark A. Moskowitz - 1997 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 3 (1):23-57.
Book reviews. [REVIEW]Ian D. Graham, Raymond Spier & Carlos Bertha - 1996 - Science and Engineering Ethics 2 (1):121-122.
Breast cancer screening in younger women: evidence and decision making.J. Mark Elwood - 1997 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 3 (3):179-186.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-06

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references