ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2012
Disability advocacy and reproductive choice: engaging with the expressivist objection.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human genome editing and the identity politics of genetic disability.Journal of community genetics · 2020Article
- Ethics in genetic counselling.Journal of community genetics · 2019Review
- Disability Experiences and Perspectives Regarding Reproductive Decisions, Parenting, and the Utility of Genetic Services: a Qualitative Study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2018Article
- Impairment Experiences, Identity and Attitudes Towards Genetic Screening: the Views of People with Spinal Muscular Atrophy.Journal of genetic counseling · 2018Article
- Generating a taxonomy for genetic conditions relevant to reproductive planning.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This professional issues paper outlines the experience and value of engagement with disability advocates, philosophy scholars and bioethicists for spirited debate of issues such as modern eugenics, the expressivist objection and reproductive choice. This process for one group of individuals, undoubtedly prompted deeper examination and questioning of some long held personal and professional views, for all participants. For this author, engagement in the "Disability Rights-Genetic Counseling Interest Group" over a full year resulted in several positive changes in genetic counselling practice as well as the development of meaningful, robust philosophical defence of the dual roles in genetic counseling; advocacy for those with disabilities, and facilitation of a full range of reproductive choices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22037896What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.