ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2020
Re-examining the Ethics of Genetic Counselling in the Genomic Era.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disability, Genetic Counseling, and Medical Education: From Eugenics to Anti-Ableism.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2025Review
- Interpretative phenomenological analysis and genetic counseling.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Review
- Attitudes Towards Non-directiveness Among Medical Geneticists in Germany and Switzerland.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024Article
- Factors affecting couples' decision making about expanded prenatal cell-free DNA screening.Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- Attitudes among parents of persons with autism spectrum disorder towards information about genetic risk and future health.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- Communicating Personal Melanoma Polygenic Risk Information: Participants' Experiences of Genetic Counseling in a Community-Based Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- 'We Should View Him as an Individual': The Role of the Child's Future Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making About Unsolicited Findings in Pediatric Exome Sequencing.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2021Article
- The Challenge of CRISPR-Cas Toward Bioethics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Review
- No Man (or Woman) Is an Island?Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Respect for patient autonomy has served as the dominant ethical principle of genetic counselling, but as we move into a genomic era, it is time to actively re-examine the role that this principle plays in genetic counselling practice. In this paper, we argue that the field of genetic counselling should move away from its emphasis on patient autonomy and toward the incorporation of a more balanced set of principles that allows counsellors to offer clear guidance about how best to obtain or use genetic information. We begin with a brief history of how respect for patient autonomy gained such emphasis in the field and how it has taken on various manifestations over time, including the problematic concept of nondirectiveness. After acknowledging the field's preliminary move away from nondirectiveness, we turn to a series of arguments about why the continued dominance of patient autonomy has become untenable given the arrival of the genomic era. To conclude, we describe how a more complete set of bioethical principles can be adapted and used by genetic counsellors to strengthen their practice without undermining patient autonomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.