Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (2):195-205 (2017)

Abstract
In the near future developments in non-invasive prenatal testing may soon provide couples with the opportunity to test for and diagnose a much broader range of heritable and congenital conditions than has previously been possible. Inevitably, this has prompted much ethical debate on the possible implications of NIPT for providing couples with opportunities for reproductive choice by way of routine prenatal screening. In view of the possibility to test for a significantly broader range of genetic conditions with NIPT, the European Society of Human Genetics and American Society of Human Genetics recommend that, pending further debate, prenatal screening for reproductive choice should only be offered where concerning serious congenital conditions and childhood disorders. In support of this recommendation, the ESHG and ASHG discuss a number of ethical issues on which they prompt further debate: the informational privacy of the future child, the trivialization of abortion, the risk of information overload, and issues of distributive justice. This paper responds to this call with further reflection on each ethical issue and how it relates to the moral justification of providing couples with opportunities for meaningful reproductive choice. The paper concludes that whilst there may be good reasons for qualifying the scope of any unsolicited prenatal screening offer to serious congenital conditions and childhood disorders, if prenatal screening is justified for providing couples with opportunities for meaningful reproductive choice, then health services may have obligations to empower couples with the same opportunity where concerning other conditions.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11019-016-9725-2
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,809
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Why Abortion is Immoral.Don Marquis - 1989 - Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):183-202.
Why Abortion Is Immoral.Don Marquis - 1989 - Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):183-202.
The Right Not to Know: An Autonomy Based Approach.R. Andorno - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (5):435-439.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

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.
The Public Must Decide Whether Genetic Screening is Ethical.[author unknown] - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (1):62-62.
Prenatal Screening for Neural Tube Defects: A Choice for All.Lee N. Muecke - 1992 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 36 (1):87-96.
Prenatal Screening in Jewish Law.J. Brown - 1990 - Journal of Medical Ethics 16 (2):75-80.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-09-10

Total views
31 ( #339,538 of 2,425,819 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #122,765 of 2,425,819 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes