Just choice: a Danielsian analysis of the aims and scope of prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 22 (4):545-555 (2019)

Authors
Peter Schröder
Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Abstract
Developments in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing and cell-free fetal DNA analysis raise the possibility that antenatal services may soon be able to support couples in non-invasively testing for, and diagnosing, an unprecedented range of genetic disorders and traits coded within their unborn child’s genome. Inevitably, this has prompted debate within the bioethics literature about what screening options should be offered to couples for the purpose of reproductive choice. In relation to this problem, the European Society of Human Genetics and American Society of Human Genetics tentatively recommend that any expansion of this type of screening, as facilitated by NIPT, should be limited to serious congenital and childhood disorders. In support of this recommendation, the ESHG and ASHG cite considerations of distribution justice. Notably, however, an account of justice in the organization and provision of this type of screening which might substantiate this recommendation has yet to be developed. This paper attempts to redress this oversight through an investigation of Norman Daniels’ theory of Just health: meeting health needs fairly. In line with this aim, the paper examines what special moral importance screening for the purpose of reproductive choice might have where concerning serious congenital and childhood disorders in particular. The paper concludes that screening for reproductive choice where concerning serious congenital and childhood disorders may be important for providing women with fair opportunity to protect their health.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11019-019-09888-5
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: 47,122
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Justice as Fairness: A Restatement.C. L. Ten - 2003 - Mind 112 (447):563-566.
Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare.Richard J. Arneson - 1989 - Philosophical Studies 56 (1):77 - 93.
Health as a Theoretical Concept.Christopher Boorse - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (4):542-573.
Why Abortion is Immoral.Don Marquis - 1989 - Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):183-202.

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Qualifying Choice: Ethical Reflection on the Scope of Prenatal Screening.Greg Stapleton - 2017 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (2):195-205.
Screening for Disability: A Eugenic Pursuit?John Gillott - 2001 - Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (suppl 2):21-23.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-02-17

Total views
14 ( #627,962 of 2,289,298 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #149,330 of 2,289,298 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature