Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27695660›Full record

ArticleCurrent genetic medicine reports2016

Psychiatric Genetics in Child Custody Proceedings: Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues.

Maya Sabatello, S Appelbaum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current genetic medicine reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
21.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Psychiatric Genetic Data of Children in Proceedings to Terminate Parental Rights.The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law · 2021
    Article
  2. International Society of Psychiatric Genetics Ethics Committee: Issues facing us.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2019
    Review
  3. Article
  4. The Precision Medicine Nation.The Hastings Center report · 2017
    Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maya SabatelloAssistant Professor of Clinical Bioethics in the Division of Law, Ethics, and Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.
S AppelbaumElizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Psychiatry, Medicine, and Law, and Director, Center for Research on Ethical, Legal & Social Implications of Psychiatric, Neurologic & Behavioral Genetics, Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.
Columbia University · US

Funding

Center for Research on the Ethical, Legal and Social Implications of Psychiatric, Neurologic and Behavioral GeneticsP50HG007257 · NHGRI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI APPELBAUM, PAUL STUART · 2013 to 2017
$5.4M
Center for Research on Ethical, Legal & Social Implications of Psychiatric, Neurologic & Behavioral GeneticsRM1HG007257 · NHGRI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI APPELBAUM, PAUL STUART · 2018 to 2021
$4.4M
Impact of Psychiatric Genetic Data on Civil Litigation and its Relationship with StigmaK01HG008653 · NHGRI · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE DBA RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, INC · PI SABATELLO, MAYA · 2015 to 2019
$871k
NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG008653NHGRI NIH HHS P50 HG007257NHGRI NIH HHS RM1 HG007257United States NHGRI
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper considers the ethical, legal, and social issues raised by the prospect of increasing use of psychiatric genetic data in child custody litigation. Although genetic tests cannot currently confirm a parent or child's psychiatric diagnosis, it is likely that as relevant findings emerge, they will be introduced in family courts to challenge parental capacity. Here, we draw on three projected, but plausible, scenarios for obtaining psychiatric data about parents -- imposed genetic testing, access to medical records, and genetic theft -- then consider the use of psychiatric genetic data of children, to highlight the issues that judges, child custody evaluators, and clinicians who may provide treatment for parents or children with mental health issues will need to consider. These include: genetic privacy, stigma, genetic surveillance, and judicial and health professionals' bias. We argue that the unchecked introduction of psychiatric genetic data may have a detrimental effect on the administration of justice. In particular, the article highlights the risk that the (mis)use of psychiatric genetic data in custody disputes would 1) exacerbate stigma and treatment-avoidance among parents and incentivize privacy violations to pressure parents to relinquish parental rights; 2) disproportionately affect poor parents and single mothers of color involved with Child Protective Services; and 3) detract attention from social and environmental factors impacting mental health to the detriment of the families involved. Awareness of these issues and an understanding of the meaning of genomic data by judges and custody evaluators will be pivotal in ensuring that justice is served.

Indexed as

child custody evaluatorcustody disputesgenetic predispositionprivacypsychiatric geneticsstigma

Identifiers

PMID27695660
PMCPMC5040211
OpenAlexW2473964999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.