Should Non-Invasiveness Change Informed Consent Procedures for Prenatal Diagnosis?

Health Care Analysis 19 (2):122-132 (2011)

Abstract
Empirical evidence suggests that some health professionals believe consent procedures for the emerging technology of non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) should become less rigorous than those currently used for invasive prenatal testing. In this paper, we consider the importance of informed consent and informed choice procedures for protecting autonomy in those prenatal tests which will give rise to a definitive result. We consider whether there is anything special about NIPD that could sanction a change to consent procedures for prenatal diagnosis or otherwise render informed decision-making less important. We accept the claim that the absence of risk of miscarriage to some extent lessens the gravity of the decision to test compared with invasive methods of testing. However, we also claim that the definitive nature of the information received, and the fact that the information can lead to decisions of great significance, makes NIPD an important choice. This choice should only be made by means of a rigorous and appropriately supported decision-making process (assuming that this is what the pregnant woman wants). We conclude that, on balance, consent procedures for NIPD should mirror those for invasive testing, albeit without the need to emphasise procedure-related risk
Keywords Autonomy  Decision making  Informed choice  Informed consent  Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis  Prenatal diagnosis
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10728-010-0146-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,299
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics.Onora O'Neill - 2002 - Cambridge University Press.
Some Limits of Informed Consent.O. O’Neill - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (1):4-7.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A New Era in Prenatal Testing: Are We Prepared? [REVIEW]Dagmar Schmitz - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (3):357-364.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A New Era in Prenatal Testing: Are We Prepared? [REVIEW]Dagmar Schmitz - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (3):357-364.
Autonomy and Freedom of Choice in Prenatal Genetic Diagnosis.Elisabeth Hildt - 2002 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (1):65-72.
Collective Informed Consent and Decision Power.Jukka Varelius - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):39-50.
Informed Consent to Breaking Bad News.Abraham Rudnick - 2002 - Nursing Ethics 9 (1):61-66.
Prenatal Diagnosis and Discrimination Against the Disabled.L. Gillam - 1999 - Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (2):163-171.
Can Broad Consent Be Informed Consent?M. Sheehan - 2011 - Public Health Ethics 4 (3):226-235.
Autonomy, Consent and the Law.Sheila McLean - 2010 - Routledge-Cavendish.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-11-24

Total views
30 ( #312,639 of 2,290,778 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #119,771 of 2,290,778 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature