18 found
Sort by:
  1. Anneke Lucassen, Guy Widdershoven, Suzanne Metselaar, Angela Fenwick & Michael Parker (2014). Genetic Testing of Children: The Need for a Family Perspective. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (3):26-28.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. A. Lucassen & A. Fenwick (2012). Testing Children for Adult Onset Conditions: The Importance of Contextual Clinical Judgement. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (9):531-532.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. D. McBride & A. Lucassen (2011). Mainstreaming Genetics: The Potential for Miscommunication. Clinical Ethics 6 (4):159-161.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Bert Molewijk & Anneke Lucassen (2011). Clinical Ethics Committee Case 14: How Should We Transfer a Euthanasia Request Between General Practice and a Hospital Setting? Clinical Ethics 6 (2):58-63.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. R. Wheeler, P. Spargo & A. Lucassen (2011). The Shifting Sands of Patient Autonomy and Public Interest Considerations in Health Care. Clinical Ethics 6 (4):203-206.
    The past few decades have seen patient autonomy ascend to a prime position in health care. Patient consent is seen as a key component to expression of autonomy. Yet, interventions may also be justified without consent because they are deemed to be in the public interest. We observe some subtle shifts in balance in these justifications in health care and illustrate these with a range of examples. We hope thereby to stimulate a more explicit debate so that health-care professionals can (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. N. Hallowell, S. Cooke, G. Crawford, A. Lucassen, M. Parker & C. Snowdon (2009). An Investigation of Patients' Motivations for Their Participation in Genetics-Related Research. Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (1):37-45.
    Design: Qualitative interview study. Participants: Fifty-nine patients with a family history of cancer who attend a regional cancer genetics clinic in the UK were interviewed about their current and previous research experiences. Findings: Interviewees gave a range of explanations for research participation. These were categorised as (a) social—research participation benefits the wider society by progressing science and improving treatment for everyone; (b) familial—research participation may improve healthcare and benefit current or future generations of the participant’s family; and (c) personal—research participation (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. N. Hallowell, S. Cooke, G. Crawford, M. Parker & A. Lucassen (2009). Healthcare Professionals' and Researchers' Understanding of Cancer Genetics Activities: A Qualitative Interview Study. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (2):113-119.
    Aims: To describe individuals’ perceptions of the activities that take place within the cancer genetics clinic, the relationships between these activities and how these relationships are sustained. Design: Qualitative interview study. Participants: Forty individuals involved in carrying out cancer genetics research in either a clinical (n = 28) or research-only (n = 12) capacity in the UK. Findings: Interviewees perceive research and clinical practice in the subspecialty of cancer genetics as interdependent. The boundary between research and clinical practice is described (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. S. Cooke, G. Crawford, M. Parker, A. Lucassen & N. Hallowell (2008). Recall of Participation in Research Projects in Cancer Genetics: Some Implications for Research Ethics. Clinical Ethics 3 (4):180-184.
    The aim of this study is to assess patients' recall of their previous research participation. Recall was established during interviews and compared with entries from clinical notes. Participants were 49 patients who had previously participated in different types of research. Of the 49 patients, 45 (92%) interviewees recalled 69 of 109 (63%) study participations. Level of recall varied according to the type of research, some participants clearly recalled the details of research aims, giving consent and research procedures. Others recalled procedures (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. G. C. Crawford & A. M. Lucassen (2008). Disclosure of Genetic Information Within Families: A Case Report. Clinical Ethics 3 (1):7-10.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. N. Hallowell, S. Cooke, G. Crawford, M. Parker & A. Lucassen (2008). Ethics and Research Governance: The Views of Researchers, Health-Care Professionals and Other Stakeholders. Clinical Ethics 3 (2):85-90.
    The objective of this study is to describe researchers', health-care providers' and other stakeholders' views of ethical review and research governance procedures. The study design involved qualitative semi-structured interviews. Participants included 60 individuals who either undertook research in the subspecialty of cancer genetics (n = 40) or were involved in biomedical research in other capacities (n = 20), e.g. research governance and oversight, patient support groups or research funding. While all interviewees observed that oversight is necessary to protect research participants, (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. A. Lucassen & J. Kaye (2006). Genetic Testing Without Consent: The Implications of the New Human Tissue Act 2004. Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (12):690-692.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Anneke Lucassen & Michael Parker (2006). The UK Genethics Club: Clinical Ethics Support for Genetic Services. Clinical Ethics 1 (4):219-223.
    The UK Genethics Club was established in November 2001 in order to provide a national forum of ethics support for the profession of clinical genetics in the UK. The forum brings together health professionals, medical ethicists and lawyers and support is provided through detailed discussion of cases and sharing of good practice. Clinical genetics professionals had previously voiced concerns about making extremely difficult ethical decisions, with profound implications, in something of a vacuum. Professionals saw a lack of guidance in the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Anneke Lucassen (2005). Families and Genetic Testing: The Case of Jane and Phyllis. In Richard E. Ashcroft (ed.), Case Analysis in Clinical Ethics. Cambridge University Press. 7--26.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Anneke Lucassen (2005). Response to Ethical Dissections of the Case. In Richard E. Ashcroft (ed.), Case Analysis in Clinical Ethics. Cambridge University Press. 213.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. A. Lucassen (2000). The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics: Edited by Theresa Marteau and Martin Richards, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 1999, 359 Pages, Pound18.95/US$29.95 (Pb). [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (6):479-479.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. A. Lucassen (1999). Inherited Susceptibility to Cancer: Clinical, Predictive and Ethical Perspectives. Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (6):551-551.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. A. Lucassen (1995). Genes and Human Self-Knowledge. Journal of Medical Ethics 21 (4):250-250.