Personal theories of inheritance, coping strategies, risk perception and engagement in hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer families offered genetic testing

From the geneticist's (or 'genetic counsellor's') perspective, lay models of inheritance can be perceived as problematic because they might interfere with understanding and acceptance of the explanation of inheritance provided in genetic counselling. The work presented here forms part of a larger qualitative grounded-theory study where the aim was to develop theory that could explain variations in adjustment to genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer (HNPCC). Ten of the 29 individuals interviewed who were at 50% or 25% risk used a 'personal theory of inheritance' to justify or explain a belief that they did, or did not, carry the family mutation. Two others indicated that, as a coping strategy, they chose to believe themselves to be carriers. This article presents part of the theory of engagement that was constructed using this data, relating to the process of development of risk perception. The theory suggests that for some individuals, these beliefs can form part of a process of coping and coming to terms with risk. An exploration of these processes may help practitioners to better understand the complexity of risk perception in individuals at genetic risk for cancer, particularly those preparing for predictive test results. Further development and testing of the theory is discussed.

A randomised controlled trial of breast cancer genetics services in South East Scotland: psychological impact

This study compared the psychological impact of two models of breast cancer genetics services in South East Scotland. One hundred and seventy general practices were randomised to refer patients to the existing standard regional service or the novel community-based service. Participants completed postal questionnaires at baseline (n=373), 4 weeks (n=276) and 6 months (n=263) to assess perceived risk of breast cancer, subjective and objective understanding of genetics and screening issues, general psychological distress, cancer worry and health behaviours. For participants in both arms of the trial, there were improvements in subjective and objective understanding up to 4 weeks which were generally sustained up to 6 months. However, improvements in subjective understanding for the women at low risk of breast cancer (i.e. not at significantly increased risk) in the standard service arm did not reach statistical significance. Cancer worry was significantly reduced at 6 months for participants in both arms of the trial. The two models of cancer genetics services tested were generally comparable in terms of the participants' psychological outcomes. Therefore, decisions regarding the implementation of the novel community-based service should be based on the resources required and client satisfaction with the service.

Psychosocial issues in cancer genetics--current status and future directions

Diagnostic tests are now available that allow genetic testing for several types of cancer. The aim of genetic counseling and testing for cancer is to educate individuals about cancer risk and cancer prevention, which it is hoped will lead to a reduction in morbidity and mortality. However, at this relatively early stage in the development of genetic counseling and testing programs, information is needed on the psychosocial impact of such programs on both the individual counselee and his/her family. This paper reviews the findings obtained during the past decade on the uptake of genetic testing, reasons for undergoing genetic testing, and the impact of genetic counseling and testing on feelings of distress and guilt. Specific attention is paid to experiences with prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy and the effectiveness of the uptake of and satisfaction with these risk-reducing procedures. In addition, the possible impact of genetic testing on insurance, work and future plans is discussed. Suggestions are given for translating research findings into psychosocial services and future research efforts.

Medical and lay attitudes towards genetic screening and testing in Finland

The purpose of this study was to compare physicians', midwives' and lay people's attitudes towards genetic screening and testing to find out whether medical education and experience influence attitudes of genetic screening and testing. The study was based on comparison of answers to joint questions in three different cross-sectional postal surveys between October 1996 and April 1998 in Finland. Target groups were physicians (study base n=772, response rate 74%, including gynaecologists, paediatricians, general practitioners and clinical geneticists), midwives and public health nurses (collectively referred to as midwives in the following; n=800, response rate 79%), and lay people (n=2000, response rate 62%). Midwives were more worried about the consequences of genetic testing and stressed the autonomy of the customer more strongly than lay people did. Furthermore, professionals considered that lay peoples' expectations as regards to genetic testing are too high. Having more medical education was related to having less 'cannot say' and missing responses. Our results do not suggest that major conflicts about the direction of genetic testing and screening would arise in near future. However, different positions and interests should be considered. Reporting in public about new prospects and developments in medical genetics should pay more attention also to concerns for balancing promises and drawbacks.

Parental attitudes regarding newborn screening of PKU and DMD

The ability to perform predictive genetic testing of children raises ethical concerns. Current guidelines support the screening of newborns for conditions in which early treatment reduces morbidity and mortality, and oppose most other predictive genetic screening and testing in childhood. Little is known, however, about parental attitudes. We conducted focus groups to gain information on the attitudes, beliefs, and concerns of parents about newborn screening and testing for both treatable and untreatable conditions that present in childhood. Respondents across racial groups support mandatory newborn screening for treatable conditions like phenylketonuria (PKU), citing lack of parental knowledge, and concerns about immature parental decision-makers. Parents do, however, want more information. Citing a variety of psychosocial concerns, respondents believe that parents should have access to predictive genetic testing for childhood onset conditions, even when there are no proven treatments. Respondents want this information to make reproductive and non-reproductive plans and decisions. Although respondents varied in their personal interest in testing, overwhelmingly they believed that the decisions belong to the parents. Professional guidelines that proscribe predictive testing for untreatable childhood onset conditions should be re-examined in light of consumer attitudes.

Attitudes, knowledge, risk perceptions and decision-making among women with breast and/or ovarian cancer considering testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 and their spouses

A limited number of studies have examined the involvement of spouses in the decision-making process for genetic testing as well as impact of the actual testing. This report presents data from 40 women with a personal history of breast and/or ovarian cancer who were considering genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 and their spouses. We examined knowledge and attitudes regarding genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility, perceptions of the likelihood that their wives (the women) had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, pros and cons of genetic testing, spouses' satisfaction with their involvement in the decision-making process and additional resources they would find helpful. Knowledge about cancer genetics and genetic testing for BRCA1 and BCA2 was limited among both women and their spouses. Up to one-third of spouses indicated that they would like to avail themselves of additional sources of information about BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. Most spouses indicated that they thought their wives had a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and that their wives' breast cancers would recur. Pros of genetic testing were emphasized more than cons among both parties. Overall, spouses were satisfied with their role in the decision-making process. Future interventions to improve the decision-making process regarding genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility should be undertaken.

How disturbing is it to be approached for a genetic cascade screening programme for familial hypercholesterolaemia? Psychological impact and screenees' views

OBJECTIVES

To assess the screenees' views on, and the psychological impact of, a family-based genetic screening programme for familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) and to evaluate non-participation.

METHODS

Self-administered questionnaires were filled out at the time of screening and after communication of the test result. Non-participants were interviewed by phone.

RESULTS

Of the people approached for screening, 2% did not participated. These 2% were not interested, had already been clinically diagnosed, or were afraid of insurance consequences. 677 screenees participated, of whom 215 (32%) tested FH positive. Less than 5% of the screenees were critical of the approach and the information provided. 20% of the screenees expressed feelings of social pressure. Effects on mood were minimal to absent, as were general 'quality of life' effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for FH is highly acceptable to screenees, although social pressure is prevalent. Only a small percentage of people being approached did not participate.

Finnish physicians' interest in genetic screening

OBJECTIVES

To report on Finnish physicians' opinions on the possible future use of genetic screening and their interest in knowing their own risk for diseases.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey mailed to gynaecologists, paediatricians, general practitioners and clinical geneticists. Both leading physicians and a sample of other practitioners were included (response rate 74%, n=571).

RESULTS

Physicians preferred genetic testing of people at risk over population-wide screening. Breast and colon cancer, familial hypercholesterolaemia and juvenile diabetes were diseases for which screening was most often considered useful. The most popular target group was the whole population. Opinions on the stability of genetic screening were not uniform, and physicians did not take a stand on genetic screening as a whole but differentiated by disease and target group. Those wanting to know their own risk for diseases supported screening procedures in general more than did other physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians were not enthusiastic about genetic screening. Nevertheless, testing of individuals with a family history of certain diseases is likely to become more widespread.

The regulation of home diagnostic tests for genetic disorders: can the FDA deny a premarket application on the basis of the device's social impacts?

This article discusses the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to regulate home use diagnostics for genetic disorders based on the social effects of the devices in the premarket approval process (PMA). It begins with a discussion of the potential social impacts of home use genetic diagnostics, focusing particularly on the psychological effects of the devices. The article then discusses the FDA's past experience in regulating home use diagnostics for HIV and for drugs of abuse testing under its PMA authority. In approving PMA applications for home tests for HIV and drugs of abuse, the FDA has considered various social effects of the devices and tailored its approval to these considerations. However, the agency did not deny approval because of social considerations. The author argues that the FDA's past experience in approving PMA applications indicates both a willingness to consider social considerations in the PMA process and that the agency may deny a PMA application based on social considerations in appropriate circumstances. The author also argues that the FDA may deny application if the social impacts and other health risks of the device greatly outweigh the therapeutic benefits of the device. For example, in applications involving late onset genetic disorders for which no therapeutic options currently exist, the social risks of the device may be found to outweigh the benefits to health and therefore the FDA may deny a PMA application in these situations.

General practitioners and predictive genetic testing for late-onset diseases in Flanders: what are their opinions and do they want to be involved?

OBJECTIVE

Investigate the attitudes of general practitioners (GPs) concerning predictive testing for late-onset diseases, as well as the perception of their own role in this context.

METHODS

356 GPs received mail questionnaires with telephone pre-notifications and reminders.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was returned by 60% (n=215). The GPs' attitudes toward predictive testing for breast cancer, thyroid cancer, Alzheimer disease and Huntington's disease were influenced by the availability and the type of preventive and therapeutic options, the age of onset of the disease as well as by ethical concerns. Regarding a possible tasks for GPs, most of the GPs focussed on gate-keeping aspects, such as providing information and making referrals.

CONCLUSION

The GPs were supportive of a limited role for general practice in predictive testing. Genetic education for GPs is needed, with attention to non-directiveness and the characteristic psychosocial and ethical implications of this particular type of genetic testing.

Disease knowledge and attitudes toward predictive testing and prenatal diagnosis in families with Machado-Joseph disease from the Azores Islands (Portugal)

OBJECTIVE

Machado-Joseph disease (MJD) reaches its highest prevalence world-wide in the Azores, thus constituting a public health problem in these islands. The aim of the study was thus to (1) determine the level of knowledge about the disease; (2) estimate the expected level of request for predictive testing, and (3) analyse the intentions of at-risk individuals concerning their reproductive decisions.

METHODS

A questionnaire on these points was distributed to 42 affected and 36 at-risk individuals.

RESULTS

As expected, the educational level of the respondents was significantly associated with the level of knowledge about the disease. The survey indicated that 83.3% of the at-risk individuals would make use of predictive test and that 77.8% would make use of prenatal diagnosis. Of the latter, 36.1% would terminate pregnancy if confronted with a positive result for the fetus.

CONCLUSIONS

The level of knowledge about MJD in the Azorean families is considered to be fair. Although the actual behavior can prove to be different from the intentions put forward by at-risk individuals based solely on the results of this study we can estimate that the request for a predictive test would be quite high. The intentions expressed by at-risk individuals seem to indicate that the prenatal diagnosis will have an effect on their reproductive decisions. Results obtained certify the importance of implementing genetic testing for MJD in the Azores.

Attitudes and distress levels in women at risk to carry a BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutation who decline genetic testing

Genetic testing enables women at risk for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer to find out whether they have inherited the gene mutation, and if so, to opt for undergoing frequent surveillance and/or prophylactic surgery. However, the option to know about one's genetic status is not always seen as a benefit by women at risk. Motives for declining genetic testing were explored in 13 women at 25% or 50% risk to be a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carrier, who participated in a surveillance program for breast/ovarian cancer (the non-tested group). We hypothesized that high anxiety might be an important motive to decline testing. In addition, we investigated whether the non-tested group differed from a reference group of women who did undergo the test (tested group; n = 85) with regard to biographical factors, experience with cancer in relatives, and personality traits. Most non-tested women (10/13) were satisfied with participating in the surveillance program. Four reported to feel emotionally unprepared to cope with the consequences of testing. Compared with the tested group, the non-tested women had similar mean distress levels (which were not high), but a higher education level, they were more often childless, showed more reluctance towards prophylactic surgery, were younger when first confronted with a relative affected with breast/ovarian cancer, and were longer aware of the genetic nature of the disease. This study showed that women were more likely to have thoroughly reflected on their decision not to undergo genetic testing, than to deny the whole issue due to high anxiety. Being confronted at a relatively young age with breast/ovarian cancer in a relative, and being aware of the genetic risk for a many years, may have resulted in the risk for cancer becoming an integrated part of their lives. However, generalization of these results to women who neither underwent the test nor participated in a surveillance program should be considered with caution.

Understanding why negative genetic test results sometimes fail to reassure

A proportion of those receiving negative results following predictive genetic testing desire future bowel screening. This is despite a negative result meaning a general population risk of 1:7500 and despite bowel screening being experienced as aversive and clinically unnecessary. This study aimed to investigate perceptions of risk, illness, and tests amongst those receiving negative results following predictive genetic testing. Interviews with nine people receiving negative genetic test results for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) were analyzed using the qualitative method, interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). Those not reassured by negative genetic test results perceived a continuing risk to themselves and to their children. Two sets of perceptions emerged that might explain this: (1). perceptions of the genetic basis of the condition (FAP). Although the condition was perceived to be genetic, genetic status was seen as transient, so a result today could not predict the future. The condition was also seen as caused by factors other than genes, so information about only one risk factor could not be reassuring. (2). Perceptions of the genetic test. There was a lack of conviction in the ability of the genetic test, based on a blood sample, to predict a disease located in the bowel. These results suggest that some individuals receiving negative test results are not reassured because of their representations of the cause of their condition and the nature of the tests they undergo. It may be that eliciting and, when appropriate, changing people's representations prior to testing may enable those receiving negative results to be more reassured about their residual risk.

Attitudes toward genetic testing in patients at risk for HNPCC/FAP and the German population

Adequate knowledge regarding hereditary diseases and genetics, as well as personal attitudes toward gene tests, are major determinants of optimal utilization of genetic testing. In the present study, we aimed to explore the general attitudes toward genetic testing in a sample representative of the German general population (n = 2,076) and to compare the attitudes of persons at risk for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer/familial adenomatous polyposis (HNPCC/FAP) (n = 36) who had attended a university genetic counseling service, with a matched general population sample. We administered a subset of a questionnaire previously used in a Finnish study (Jallinoja et al., 1998). The 12 statements pertain to approval, disapproval, and concern for genetic testing. Overall, the results reveal high approval of genetic testing in the German population and in at-risk persons. In accordance with other studies, we find that the attitudes of individuals for whom hereditary disease is a salient issue of personal relevance and the attitudes of the general public are very similar. Only a few significant differences between these two samples emerged, indicating that at-risk persons hold a more favourable view of the testing. One intriguing finding was the high rate of "don't know" responses, especially in the general population sample. Compared to results from Finland, approval of genetic testing is lower in the German population, and endorsement of "don't knows" is remarkably higher. We argue for increased attention to the issue of attitude change after genetic counseling and for the need of comparative cross-cultural research on attitudes toward gene technology.

Likelihood of attending bowel screening after a negative genetic test result: the possible influence of health professionals

This study was undertaken to determine the extent to which the reported likelihood of attending future bowel screening following negative genetic testing results for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) varies between the type of health professional providing care and the country of testing. The study subjects were 103 unaffected adults at risk for FAP who received negative results following predictive DNA testing. Our study indicates that the reported likelihood of attending bowel screening was higher in those given results by nongenetics physicians, rather than by genetics professionals; the reported likelihood of attending bowel screening under these circumstances was also higher in the UK than in Australia. Both of these results were affected by the perceived chances of developing FAP, and, in the case of the country of testing, by the perceived accuracy of the genetic test result and the perceived seriousness of the disease. How and what health professionals communicate with patients about genetic testing may explain the differences between type of health professional and country of testing and attitudes toward bowel screening. If this is the case, training in communication may change patients' perceptions and, in turn, their behavioral intentions and actions following a negative test result.

Impact of genetic counseling and testing on colorectal cancer screening behavior

One goal of cancer genetic counseling is to improve early detection and prevention of cancers by identifying individuals at risk and providing screening recommendations. This study determined the impact of genetic counseling and testing on patient's post-genetic risk assessment colorectal cancer screening behaviors. Follow-up data from patients seen August, 1996, through May, 1998, at the Johns Hopkins Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic were analyzed. Eligible patients included those without cancer who were due for a colon examination by the time of follow-up, based on recommendations given during genetic risk assessment (GRA). We analyzed the role of gender, age, time since GRA, prior screening, genetic testing decision, mutation status, and post-GRA screening. Of 65 patients evaluated, 50 (76.9%) had undergone at least one endoscopic colon exam prior to visiting the Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic. At the time of GRA, 37 of 65 (56.9%) were overdue for a colon exam and at the time of follow-up, 15/65 (23.1%) were past due (p < 0.001). Patients with mutation-positive genetic tests were more likely to adhere to screening guidelines than those with negative gene tests (100% vs. 40.5%, p = 0.05). Genetic counseling and testing increases overall patient adherence with recommended colon screening, especially for those with positive genetic test results. However, patients with negative results may receive false reassurance about cancer risks and fail to follow recommended screening. Emphasis should be placed on the importance of screening even when genetic test results are negative.

Attitudes of Health Care Trainees About Genetics and Disability: Issues of Access, Health Care Communication, and Decision Making

Prior studies suggest that knowledge and attitudes of health care professionals influence patient communication and medical decision-making. To study this dynamic in the context of genetic disability, we developed a survey on health professionals' attitudes regarding disability and genetic screening and pilot-tested it on a sample of medical students, residents, and genetic counseling students (N=85). Despite minimal experience with disability or genetics, most respondents reported feeling comfortable dealing with genetics (59%) and disability (75%). The majority felt that disability caused significant suffering for both the person (51%) and family (64%), and that research should be directed toward preventing genetic disability (62%). Similar to prior literature, perceived "Quality of Life" was most often based on degrees of physical and cognitive functioning, pain, and social support. However, differences were found between genetic counseling trainees and other medical trainees in their relative emphasis of social versus medical issues in questions of disability and genetic testing, and these response patterns were associated with differences in the groups' priorities for offering information about social resources. Respondents agreed that access to genetic testing and information is personal and that testing should be available upon request for oneself (68%) and to a lesser degree for one's fetus (55%) or child (41%). However, the same individuals frequently stated that society should regulate access to such technologies. Although most felt that the patient and professional should jointly make such decisions on a case-by-case basis, it was also seen as appropriate for the health care professional to occasionally decline genetic testing. It seems appropriate that training and experience influence knowledge and attitudes. Therefore, it is critical to document knowledge and attitudes of various health care providers and trainees, including differences between various specialties, to improve educational interventions geared to this area.

The influence of IVF, multiple gestation and miscarriage on the acceptance of genetic amniocentesis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of in vitro fertilization (IVF), multiple gestation, and history of unkaryotyped miscarriage on the acceptance of genetic amniocentesis.

METHODS

We studied women expected to be at least 35 years of age at the estimated date of delivery without family history of chromosomal abnormalities or fetal structural anomalies. The influence of IVF, multiple gestation, and history of miscarriage on the acceptance rate of genetic amniocentesis was evaluated. Chi-square test and logistic regression were used for analysis.

RESULTS

In singleton pregnancies, the acceptance rate of genetic amniocentesis was 70.7% (58/82) in the IVF group compared to 77.9% (1837/2356) (P = 0.14) in the women who conceived spontaneously. The corresponding values in multiple gestation pregnancies were 71.1% (37/52) and 62.9% (34/54) respectively (P = 0.41). There was no difference in the acceptance rate of amniocentesis between singletons (70.7%) and multiple gestations (71.1%) after IVF (P = 0.96), while in women who conceived spontaneously, the acceptance rate of 78% in singletons was significantly higher than the acceptance rate of 63% in multiple gestations (P = 0.008). Adjusting for confounding variables, women with multiple gestations were about 40% less likely to accept genetic amniocentesis (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.39-1.00, P = 0.05), while women with a history of miscarriage were about 17% less likely to accept genetic amniocentesis (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.68-1.00, P = 0.05). Adjusting for multiple gestation and previous miscarriage, IVF was not independently associated with acceptance of genetic amniocentesis (OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.54-1.29, P = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in the acceptance rate of genetic amniocentesis among women with IVF pregnancies compared with those who conceive spontaneously, after adjusting for multiple gestation and previous miscarriage. Unlike women who conceive spontaneously, the decision to accept amniocentesis appears not to be influenced by the presence of multiple gestation in women with IVF pregnancies.

How families communicate about HNPCC genetic testing: findings from a qualitative study

Little is known about how hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) genetic counseling and testing information is communicated within at-risk families. This article describes findings from a qualitative study of 39 adult members from five families with known HNPCC-predisposing mutations. We evaluated how information from HNPCC genetic counseling and testing was disseminated in these families and how family members reacted to and acted on this information. We included family members who had been diagnosed with an HNPCC syndrome cancer, unaffected individuals who were at 50% risk of carrying a mutation, and their spouses. Participants included those who had undergone testing and those who had not. In general, all families had shared the news about an HNPCC mutation with at-risk relatives. Communication about HNPCC genetic counseling and testing followed the norms used for conveying other nonurgent family news. Mutation noncarriers, nontesters, and those who were not biological relatives were less involved in discussing genetic counseling and testing and perceived these processes as less relevant to them. Although all family members were generally willing to share information about HNPCC, probands and mutation carriers informed extended family members and actively persuaded others to seek counseling or testing. Family members who were persuaded to seek those services by the proband were more likely to have counseling and testing and were more likely to seek those services sooner. Genetic counseling should attempt to identify the existing communication norms within families and ways that family members can take an active role in encouraging others to learn about their cancer risk and options for testing. Interventions may also need to emphasize the relevance of hereditary cancer information beyond the immediate family and to unaffected family members who may be central to the communication process (e.g., spouses of mutation carriers).

Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 results to at-risk relatives: a cancer risk assessment program's experience

We describe results from a survey designed to assess patterns of communication within families shortly after an individual receives results of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status. Shortly after disclosure of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results, the proband was contacted by phone to administer the post disclosure survey. Questions asked included whether they had shared their results with their siblings or adult children, if there were difficulties in communicating the test results, and if there was any distress associated with the sharing of results. A total of 162 women who have received results from BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing participated in the survey. The probands shared their results more often with their female than their male relatives (P < 0.001). Probands who had tested positive for a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene shared their results more often with their relatives than did probands who were not carriers (P = 0.002). Probands reported more often that their siblings rather than their adult children had difficulties understanding the results (P = 0.001). The probands who were carriers more often reported having difficulties explaining their results to their relatives (P < 0.001) and their relatives were upset on hearing the result more often than were the relatives of probands who were not carriers (P < 0.001). The probands who were carriers reported more often that they were upset explaining their results to their relatives than did the probands who were not carriers (P < 0.001). Individuals are disclosing their test results to their relatives. Probands who are BRCA1- or BRCA2-positive are more likely to experience difficulty and distress with the communication of their test results to family members.

Duty to warn at-risk relatives for genetic disease: genetic counselors' clinical experience

When a patient refuses to inform relatives of their risk for genetic disease, the genetic healthcare professional is faced with conflicting ethical obligations. On one side of the issue is the obligation to respect and protect patients' right to privacy. On the other side is the obligation to prevent harm and promote the welfare of the family members, which suggests a responsibility to warn at-risk relatives, even without the patient's consent. In an effort to examine the actual clinical impact of this issue, we conducted a pilot study that explored genetic counselors' experience with this conflict. A survey was developed and made available to members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. Questions were either multiple-choice responses or open-ended. Almost half of respondents (119/259; 46%) had had a patient refuse to notify an at-risk relative. The most commonly cited reasons for refusal were estranged family relationships, altering family dynamics, insurance discrimination, and employment discrimination, respectively. Of these 119 counselors, 24 (21%) reported that they seriously considered warning the at-risk relatives without patient consent, and one actually did disclose. Three factors consistently made the counselors less likely to disclose: their patient's potential emotional reaction, the relationship between the relative and patient, and the chance that the relative could be aware of the disease by another means. These results suggest that while the conflict is often encountered in clinical practice, it is rare that the situation remains unresolved to the extent that genetic counselors actually consider warning at-risk relatives. However, when the situation was encountered, the counselors in this study reported a lower rate of disclosure without consent than would have been anticipated based on previous studies that used hypothetical situations. It may be that counselors do not recognize a duty to warn at-risk relatives as integral to their role and professional obligations.

Perceptions of reproductive risk and carrier testing among adolescent sisters of males with chronic granulomatous disease

Although recent research has investigated the attitudes of parents, professionals, and adult siblings toward carrier testing of minors, no studies have focused on the experiences of minor siblings of individuals with X-linked and autosomal recessive conditions. To explore adolescent sisters' perceptions of their reproductive risks, attitudes toward carrier testing, and resources for information and support, we interviewed 14 parents and 9 sisters (ages 12-15) of males with chronic granulomatous disease (CGD), a primary immunodeficiency disorder inherited in both an X-linked recessive and autosomal recessive fashion. Our semistructured telephone interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and subjected to template analysis (a common qualitative methodology). Girls were all aware that CGD is an inherited condition and each had made an assessment of her reproductive risk. All girls considered their parents to be their best source of information and support, but girls had trouble initiating discussions for fear of upsetting their parents. All girls and parents considered eventual carrier testing vital for reproductive decision-making and relationship-building. However, girls favored carrier testing at a later age and expressed more concerns about psychological risks associated with testing than did their parents. When faced with the hypothetical situation of being offered carrier testing "tomorrow," half of the parents and untested daughters disagreed on the desirability of the test, with parents more likely to favor testing. Including adolescent sisters in family-based genetic counseling that provides an opportunity for age-appropriate discussion of inheritance and the timing, risks, and benefits of carrier testing would be beneficial to them. Published 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Preconception cystic fibrosis carrier couple screening: impact, understanding, and satisfaction

The impact, understanding of test-results, and satisfaction among participating couples in a preconception cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier screening project were assessed 6 months after testing. Questionnaire data were obtained from 17/18 identified carriers, 15 partners of carriers with negative test results, and 794 (73%) other participants. None of the carriers changed their reproductive plans because of their test results. Eight participants were worried about their results, including four carriers. Those who attended a general practitioner (GP) consultation for pretest education were less worried than those who attended an educational session. Seven carriers felt less healthy. Predictors of a correct understanding of test results (correct in 62% of participants) were: positive test results, high level of knowledge of CF, high level of education, attending an educational session, and previously heard of CF. All participants who reported that they were worried, all carriers, and 95% of the other participants said that they would make the same decision to be tested again. Although couples who were educated during a GP consultation were less worried, the results of the study suggest that understanding is more correct in couples attending an educational session. The results further suggest that since satisfaction with the screening was high, worries and feeling less healthy due to the test results are probably not a great burden.

Motivations and concerns of women considering genetic testing for breast cancer: a comparison between affected and at-risk probands

Since the discovery of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, there has been an increasing demand for breast cancer risk assessment programs. In an effort to understand and serve the population such programs target better, several studies have identified factors influencing high-risk women to pursue breast cancer risk assessment and genetic testing services; none, however, has focused on how the motivations and concerns of at-risk women may differ from their previously affected counterparts, who are typically the initial members of their families to undergo genetic testing. The majority of both previously affected and unaffected women felt that preventative surgery decisions, surveillance practices, the assessment of children's risks, and increased breast cancer anxiety were "more important" or "very important" issues regarding their thoughts about genetic testing. Significantly more affected women deemed family members' opinions "more" or "very important" (p < 0.01). Opinions concerning insurance and employment discrimination did not vary significantly between groups; however, a larger percentage of affected women felt this issue was of importance. Although all issues above should be addressed with women seeking cancer risk assessment and genetic testing, this research may help health care providers to gain a greater understanding of how the motivators and concerns of high-risk women can differ with personal cancer status so that referral, counseling, and education can be executed optimally.