Abstract
AbstractNondirectiveness is widely regarded as an important principle of genetic counseling. However, numerous studies have indicated that the use of this principle and its content itself are subject to controversies. The present study aimed to verify how the nondirectiveness principle is defined by Polish geneticists, the extent to which it is considered the main principle in clinical practice, and the situations in which geneticists see the positive value of the directive action. Using quantitative and qualitative methods, the study compared the abstract declarations of the directiveness validity and the scope of this principle with the declaration of action in situations close to reality (case scenarios). The results showed that the high rank assigned to the nondirectiveness principle does not translate into the conviction about the absolute obligation to use it in clinical practice. Polish geneticists are inclined to restrict the scope of patients’ choices when these are outside of their definition of medical standard. Strong medical paternalism manifests itself particularly in invasive prenatal diagnostics, where geneticists play the role of gatekeepers. In this study, we offer hypotheses about the sources of these attitudes by analyzing the current cultural and legal context of Poland.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Health (social science)
Reference24 articles.
1. Bartels, D.M., B.S. LeRoy, P. McCarthy, and A.L. Caplan. 1997. Nondirectiveness in genetic counseling: A survey of practitioners. American Journal of Medical Genetics 72(2): 172–179.
2. Bosk, C. 1993. The workplace ideology of genetic counselors. In Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, edited by D. M. Bartels, B. LeRoy, and A. L. Caplan, 25–37. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
3. Braun, V., and V. Clark. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.
4. Brunger, F., and A. Lippman. 1995. Resistance and adherence to the norms of genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling 4(3): 151–167.
5. Caplan, A. 1993. Neutrality is not morality: The ethics of genetic counseling. In Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, edited by D.M. Bartels, B.S. LeRoy, and A.L. Caplan, 149–165. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献