Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Nursing Ethics
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Anderson, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Nondirectiveness in Prenatal Genetics: patients read between the lines

Gwen Anderson

ganderson{at}shriver.org

For decades questionnaires have been used to measure the cognitive and psychological effects of prenatal genetic testing, but little is known about why some women undergo testing and others decline. Research indicates that many factors influence decision making, including values and beliefs. What is often denied rather than recognized is that the professional and personal values and beliefs held by the health care provider influence the patient’s decision. It is assumed that, if genetic services are delivered in a nondirective manner, patients will not be affected by the provider’s personal and professional standpoint. The qualitative research data reported here challenge this assumption. Getting to know patients’ moral understanding and patterns of ethical reasoning by listening to their personal stories is recommended as a better way for nurses to help patients to make informed and autonomous decisions about prenatal genetic screening or diagnostic tests.

Key Words: ethics • genetic counselling • nondirectiveness • prenatal genetic testing

Nursing Ethics, Vol. 6, No. 2, 126-136 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/096973309900600205
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Nurs EthicsHome page
M. Evans, V. Bergum, S. Bamforth, and S. MacPhail
Relational Ethics and Genetic Counseling
Nursing Ethics, September 1, 2004; 11(5): 459 - 471.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Biol Res NursHome page
J. K. Williams and T. Tripp-Reimer
From Ecologyto Base Pairs: Nursing and Genetic Science
Biol Res Nurs, July 1, 2001; 3(1): 4 - 12.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
L. Abramsky, S. Hall, J. Levitan, and T. M Marteau
What parents are told after prenatal diagnosis of a sex chromosome abnormality: interview and questionnaire study
BMJ, February 24, 2001; 322(7284): 463 - 466.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Nurs EthicsHome page
Y.-R. Um
A Critique of a 'Wrongful Life' Lawsuit in Korea
Nursing Ethics, May 1, 2000; 7(3): 250 - 261.
[Abstract] [PDF]