Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28960139›Full record

ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics

How should we deal with misattributed paternity? A survey of lay public attitudes.

Georgia Lowe, Jonathan Pugh, Guy Kahane, Louise Corben, Sharon Lewis, Martin Delatycki, Julian Savulescu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Georgia Lowea Bruce Lefroy Centre for Genetic Health Research Murdoch Children's Research Institute and Department of Paediatrics , University of Melbourne.
Jonathan Pughb Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics , University of Oxford.
Guy Kahaneb Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics , University of Oxford.
Louise Corbenc Bruce Lefroy Centre for Genetic Health Research, Murdoch Children's Research Institute and School of Psychological Sciences , Monash University.
Sharon Lewisd Bruce Lefroy Centre for Genetic Health Research, Murdoch Children's Research Institute and Public Health Genetics , Murdoch Children's Research Institute.
Martin Delatyckie Bruce Lefroy Centre for Genetic Health Research, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Department of Paediatrics , University of Melbourne, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, and Clinical Genetics, Austin Health.
Julian Savulescua Bruce Lefroy Centre for Genetic Health Research Murdoch Children's Research Institute and Department of Paediatrics , University of Melbourne.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 104848Wellcome Trust 104848/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing use of genetic technologies in clinical and research settings increases the potential for misattributed paternity to be identified. Yet existing guidance from the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Biomedical and Behavioral Research and the Institute of Medicine (among others) offers contradictory advice. Genetic health professionals are thus likely to vary in their practice when misattributed paternity is identified, and empirical investigation into the disclosure of misattributed paternity is scarce. Given the relevance of this ethical dilemma and its significance to users of genetic services, this study aimed to investigate the attitudes of lay people with regard to the disclosure of misattributed paternity.

methodsAn online questionnaire was hosted and advertised through Amazon's Mechanical Turk to 200 United States residents aged 18 years or older. Respondents were asked to rate (via a Likert scale) the ethical permissibility of possible actions a clinician may carry out when misattributed paternity is identified. Data analysis consisted of preliminary descriptive analysis, chi-squared analysis, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.

resultsThere was no clear majority support for many of the options surveyed across different contexts, with only six out of ten scenarios displaying some general consensus. Men were more likely to support scenarios where the father is informed of paternity. Importantly, participants' views varied according to whether the desires of the father were previously expressed, suggesting that perceptions of the permissibility of a clinician's action will depend on the interests of all parties affected.

conclusionsThis sample of the general public showed attitudes that were, at least to some degree, at variance with some professional guidelines. We give arguments for why at least some of these attitudes might be justified. We argue that case-specific judgments should be made and outline some of the relevant ethical considerations. While general guidelines ought to be considered, context-specific moral judgments cannot be avoided.

Indexed as

Bioethical IssuesPaternityPublic OpinionAdultAttitudeFemaleGenetic TestingHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesTruth DisclosureYoung Adultethicsgeneticsmisattributed paternitypractice guidelines as a topicpublic perspectivequestionnaire

Identifiers

PMID28960139
PMCPMC5849225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.