The right not to know: Non‐disclosure of primary genetic test results and genetic counselors' response

Abstract

AbstractAs part of clinical genetic counseling practice, patients may request that their primary genetic test results be disclosed to someone else, such as a relative or referring provider, or request that results be disclosed to no one (non‐disclosure). In making these requests, patients employ the ethical principle of the “right not to know,” which argues that autonomous individuals can choose not to know relevant health information. Although the right not to know has been well‐studied in medicine in general, and in the return of genomic secondary findings, we are not aware of other studies that have explored the return of primary genetic test results when patients request non‐disclosure or disclosure to another individual. This study aimed to describe common clinical scenarios in which these requests occur, how genetic counselors respond, and what ethical considerations they employ in their decision‐making process. We recruited participants from the National Society of Genetic Counselors' (NSGC) “Student Research Surveys and Reminders” listserv and conducted semi‐structured interviews with 11 genetic counselors in the United States who described genetic counseling cases where this occurred. Interviews were transcribed and coded inductively, and themes were identified. Case details varied, but in our study data the requests for non‐disclosure were most commonly made by patients with poor, often oncologic, prognoses who requested their test results be disclosed to a family member instead of themselves. Genetic counselors considered similar factors in deciding how to respond to these requests: patient autonomy, medical actionability of results for the patient and family, the relationship between the patient and the person to whom results might be disclosed, and legal or practical concerns. Genetic counselors often made decisions on a case‐by‐case basis, depending on how relevant each of these factors were. This study adds to the growing body of literature regarding patients' “right not to know” and will hopefully provide guidance for genetic counselors who experience this situation in clinical practice.