Genetic risks and healthy choices: creating citizen-consumers of genetic services through empowerment and facilitation

Genetic testing to identify susceptibility to a variety of common complex diseases is increasingly becoming available. In this article, focusing on the development of genetic susceptibility testing for diet-related disease, I examine the emergence of direct-to-the-consumer genetic testing services and the (re)configuration of healthcare provision, both within and outside the specialist genetics service, in the UK. I identify two key techniques within these practices: empowerment and facilitation. Using Foucauldian social theory, I show that empowerment and facilitation are being positioned as tools for the creation of citizen-consumers who will make appropriate dietary choices, based on the results of their genetic analysis. Through these techniques, individuals are transformed into properly entrepreneurial citizens who will, through judicious choices, act to maximise their 'vital capital' (their health) and the capital of the social body. I argue that the user of these services is not purely an economic figure, making rational choices as a consumer, but that her configuration as a citizen-consumer who avails herself of genetic information and services in a proper manner ensures that she is fit to contribute to the economic life of our present.

Public interest in predictive genetic testing, including direct-to-consumer testing, for susceptibility to major depression: preliminary findings

The past decade has seen rapid advances in the identification of associations between candidate genes and a range of common multifactorial disorders. This paper evaluates public attitudes towards the complexity of genetic risk prediction in psychiatry involving susceptibility genes, uncertain penetrance and gene-environment interactions on which successful molecular-based mental health interventions will depend. A qualitative approach was taken to enable the exploration of the views of the public. Four structured focus groups were conducted with a total of 36 participants. The majority of participants indicated interest in having a genetic test for susceptibility to major depression, if it was available. Having a family history of mental illness was cited as a major reason. After discussion of perceived positive and negative implications of predictive genetic testing, nine of 24 participants initially interested in having such a test changed their mind. Fear of genetic discrimination and privacy issues predominantly influenced change of attitude. All participants still interested in having a predictive genetic test for risk for depression reported they would only do so through trusted medical professionals. Participants were unanimously against direct-to-consumer genetic testing marketed through the Internet, although some would consider it if there was suitable protection against discrimination. The study highlights the importance of general practitioner and public education about psychiatric genetics, and the availability of appropriate treatment and support services prior to implementation of future predictive genetic testing services.

Interpreting the implications of DNA ancestry tests

Shopping for genetic information has become popular, but consumers may not understand what exactly they are buying. The retail DNA industry is forcing laypersons, academics, and medical and legal professionals alike to face the crossroads of genetics, law, and society. How will we decipher the meanings of the tests, determine the value of the information provided, or appropriately encourage or discourage various applications of that genetic information? When it comes to understanding the signs at the crossroads of disciplines, something is always potentially lost in translation. This article provides an overview of the retail DNA industry, addressing a few questions ripe for misinterpretation and confusion. It argues that the challenges posed by the retail DNA industry are both intelligible and manageable; optimally, multidisciplinary individuals would guide the way, steering the courts, legislature, laboratories, and clinics toward an adequate balance of consumer protection, autonomy, and understanding.

Genetic selection for deafness: the views of hearing children of deaf adults

The concept of selecting for a disability, and deafness in particular, has triggered a controversial and sometimes acrimonious debate between key stakeholders. Previous studies have concentrated on the views of the deaf and hard of hearing, health professionals and ethicists towards reproductive selection for deafness. This study, however, is the first of its kind examining the views of hearing children of deaf adults towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis and prenatal diagnosis to select for or against deafness. Hearing children of deaf adults (or CODAs, as they call themselves, and are widely known in the deaf community) straddle both the deaf and hearing worlds, and this dual perspective makes them ideally placed to add to the academic discourse concerning the use of genetic selection for or against deafness. The study incorporated two complementary stages, using initial, semistructured interviews with key informants (CODAs and health professionals) as a means to guide the subsequent development of an electronic survey, completed anonymously by 66 individuals. The participants shared many of the same views as deaf individuals in the D/deaf (or "culturally deaf") community. The similarities extended to their opinions regarding deafness not being a disability (45.5% believed deafness was a distinct culture rather than a disability), their ambivalence towards having hearing or deaf children (72.3% indicated no preference) and their general disapproval of the use of genetic technologies to select either for or against deafness (60% believed that reproductive technologies, when used to select for or against deafness, should not be available to the community).

Disclosing the disclosure: factors associated with communicating the results of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease

This study explored the extent to which recipients of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease (AD) communicated their results to others. It also examined demographic characteristics, along with beliefs about AD, associated with such communication. Participants (N = 271) in a randomized clinical trial involving genetic testing for Apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene variants among first-degree relatives of AD patients reported their communication behaviors 6 weeks after the results disclosure. Information on beliefs about AD and genetic testing was collected at baseline. Eighty-two percent of participants receiving APOE genotype information shared their results with someone. Specifically, 64% shared with family members, 51% with spouse or significant others, 35% with friends, and 12% with health care professionals. Greater AD treatment optimism was associated with communicating results to family (OR = 1.43), spouse (OR = 1.62), friends (OR = 1.81), and health care professionals (OR = 2.20). Lower perceived risk (OR = 0.98) and higher perceived importance of genetics in the development of AD (OR = 1.93) were associated with results communication in general. Lower perceived drawbacks of AD genetic testing was associated with results communication to friends (OR = 0.65). Beliefs about AD risks and causes, genetic testing, and development of treatments partly may determine the interpersonal communication patterns of genetic susceptibility test results.

Diversity and uniformity in genetic responsibility: moral attitudes of patients, relatives and lay people in Germany and Israel

The professional and institutional responsibility for handling genetic knowledge is well discussed; less attention has been paid to how lay people and particularly people who are affected by genetic diseases perceive and frame such responsibilities. In this exploratory study we qualitatively examine the attitudes of lay people, patients and relatives of patients in Germany and Israel towards genetic testing. These attitudes are further examined in the national context of Germany and Israel, which represent opposite regulatory approaches and bioethical debates concerning genetic testing. Three major themes of responsibility emerged from the inter-group and cross-cultural comparison: self-responsibility, responsibility for kin, and responsibility of society towards its members. National contrast was apparent in the moral reasoning of lay respondents concerning, for example, the right not to know versus the duty to know (self-responsibility) and the moral conflict concerning informing kin versus the moral duty to inform (responsibility for kin). Attitudes of respondents affected by genetic diseases were, however, rather similar in both countries. We conclude by discussing how moral discourses of responsibility are embedded within cultural (national, religious) as well as phenomenological (being affected) narratives, and the role of public engagement in bioethical discourse.

Views on personalized medicine: do the attitudes of African American and white prescription drug consumers differ?

AIMS

Although recent advances in pharmacogenomics are making possible the use of genetic testing to determine the best medication for patients, little is known about how patients view such procedures. The aims for this study that were developed collaboratively as part of a community-academic partnership are: (1) What are the attitudes and perceptions of prescription drug consumers concerning personalized medicine and genetic testing for drug compatibility and how do they differ between African American and white patients? (2) What are the attitudes and perceptions of patients concerning race-based prescribing and how do they differ between African American and white patients?

METHODS

We conducted 6 focus groups, 2 with white participants and 4 with African American participants. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to ascertain common themes.

RESULTS

Our results suggest that personalized medicine and genetic testing, though not well understood by lay persons, were considered positive advances in medicine. However, participants also voiced concerns about these advances that differed by race.

CONCLUSION

This study points to the need to include perspectives of at-risk communities as we move toward wider use of this technology.

Genetics: breast cancer as an exemplar

Genetic testing for adult-onset diseases is now available. One such test is for the mutations present in the BRCA gene that result in a significantly higher risk for the development of breast cancer or ovarian cancer. Women who have one of these mutations face difficult choices in terms of increased surveillance or prophylactic surgeries. Examining experiences of women with BRCA mutations can serve as an exemplar for other populations at risk for genetically associated adult-onset diseases.

A decade of genetic counseling in frontotemporal dementia affected families: few counseling requests and much familial opposition to testing

A decade of genetic counseling of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) affected families has generated two important observations. First, the uptake rate for presymptomatic testing for FTD is low in our department of Clinical Genetics at the Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands. Second, FTD at-risk counselees reported substantial familial opposition to genetic testing, which is distinct from the attitude in Huntington Disease affected families. We hypothesize that the low acceptance for FTD genetic counseling is consequential to the familial opposition and explain this within the theoretical framework of separation-individuation. Furthermore, we hypothesize that separation-individuation problems do not similarly influence the acceptance of HD genetic counseling, due to the educative role of the well-organised patient organization for HD in the Netherlands. We offer counseling recommendations that serve to facilitate the individuation of the counselee with respect to the FTD genetic test.

Disclosure of APOE genotype for risk of Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

The apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype provides information on the risk of Alzheimer's disease, but the genotyping of patients and their family members has been discouraged. We examined the effect of genotype disclosure in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 162 asymptomatic adults who had a parent with Alzheimer's disease to receive the results of their own APOE genotyping (disclosure group) or not to receive such results (nondisclosure group). We measured symptoms of anxiety, depression, and test-related distress 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year after disclosure or nondisclosure.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in changes in time-averaged measures of anxiety (4.5 in the disclosure group and 4.4 in the nondisclosure group, P=0.84), depression (8.8 and 8.7, respectively; P=0.98), or test-related distress (6.9 and 7.5, respectively; P=0.61). Secondary comparisons between the nondisclosure group and a disclosure subgroup of subjects carrying the APOE epsilon4 allele (which is associated with increased risk) also revealed no significant differences. However, the epsilon4-negative subgroup had a significantly lower level of test-related distress than did the epsilon4-positive subgroup (P=0.01). Subjects with clinically meaningful changes in psychological outcomes were distributed evenly among the nondisclosure group and the epsilon4-positive and epsilon4-negative subgroups. Baseline scores for anxiety and depression were strongly associated with post-disclosure scores of these measures (P<0.001 for both comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

The disclosure of APOE genotyping results to adult children of patients with Alzheimer's disease did not result in significant short-term psychological risks. Test-related distress was reduced among those who learned that they were APOE epsilon4-negative. Persons with high levels of emotional distress before undergoing genetic testing were more likely to have emotional difficulties after disclosure. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00571025.)

Attitudes Regarding Predictive Testing for Retinitis Pigmentosa

PURPOSE

To assess attitudes towards predictive testing for autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa (ADRP).

METHODS

A prospective questionnaire study of 46 affected adults and their adult family members identified from pedigrees clearly consistent with ADRP or who had had DNA-testing confirmation of ADRP before the study commenced.

RESULTS

High proportions of unaffected siblings (73%) and patients (67%) agreed to prenatal testing. Patients agreed to prenatal testing. Patients agreed significantly more often than unaffected siblings that treatment should be available prior to initiating predictive testing. Psychoemotional distress was reported in 57% of the affected adults and their family members in recollecting their own predictive testing as children.

CONCLUSIONS

ADRP families indicate a favorable attitude towards testing presymptomatic children with counseling to lessen the psychological and social impact of results.

Perceptions of genetic discrimination among people at risk for Huntington's disease: a cross sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To assess the nature and prevalence of genetic discrimination experienced by people at risk for Huntington's disease who had undergone genetic testing or remained untested.

DESIGN

Cross sectional, self reported survey.

SETTING

Seven genetics and movement disorders clinics servicing rural and urban communities in Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

233 genetically tested and untested asymptomatic people at risk for Huntington's disease (response rate 80%): 167 underwent testing (83 had the Huntington's disease mutation, 84 did not) and 66 chose not to be tested.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Self reported experiences of genetic discrimination and related psychological distress based on family history or genetic test results.

RESULTS

Discrimination was reported by 93 respondents (39.9%). Reported experiences occurred most often in insurance (29.2%), family (15.5%), and social (12.4%) settings. There were few reports of discrimination in employment (6.9%), health care (8.6%), or public sector settings (3.9%). Although respondents who were aware that they carried the Huntington's disease mutation reported the highest levels of discrimination, participation in genetic testing was not associated with increased levels of genetic discrimination. Family history of Huntington's disease, rather than the result of genetic testing, was the main reason given for experiences of genetic discrimination. Psychological distress was associated with genetic discrimination (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic discrimination was commonly reported by people at risk for Huntington's disease and was a source of psychological distress. Family history, and not genetic testing, was the major reason for genetic discrimination.

Implications of living with a strong family history of breast cancer

The findings presented here are from a qualitative study in which data were gathered from 20 women who had received inconclusive genetic testing results for inherited breast cancer susceptibility. Before describing the significance, for them, of their genetic test results, all of the participants related what it was like to live with a strong family history of breast cancer. The focus of this article is the women's experience of living with a personal and strong family history of breast cancer. For these women, having such a history had become a fact of life that could not be ignored.Three themes were identified in the data: expecting and dealing with a diagnosis of breast cancer protecting oneself and others, and increasing exposure to cancer screening procedures. These themes address the underlying reality that having a personal and family history of breast cancer is not an isolated situation but part of one's journey in choosing to undergo genetic testing for inherited breast cancer susceptibility.

Can we assume that research participants are utility maximisers?

The objective of this study was to experimentally examine by means of an information manipulation if respondents are adhering to the utility theory axiom of utility maximisation. A repeated measure experimental design was used. Assessments were conducted pre- and post-intervention with self-administered questionnaires. The study participants were 158 (142 after exclusions) first year undergraduate students, Bangor University (UK). The intervention-information manipulation-did not induce the hypothesised changes in the perceived pros and cons of, or desire for, genetic testing and counselling for breast cancer; correlation revealed a weak relationship between the pros and cons of and desire for testing and counselling. We conclude that there was no evidence of utility maximisation-the key tenet of utility theory-being used. Given the contradiction between the findings of this study and others, there is a need to conduct further research into utility maximisation.

Acceptance of genetic testing for hereditary breast ovarian cancer among study enrollees from an African American kindred

Clinical availability of genetic testing for cancer predisposition genes is generating a major challenge for U.S. health care systems to provide relevant genetic services to underserved populations. Here we present rates of study enrollment and utilization of genetic testing in a research study on BRCA1 testing acceptance in one large kindred. We also present data on baseline access to genetic information as well as enabling and obstructing factors to study enrollment. The study population included female and male members of an African American kindred based in the rural southern United States with an identified BRCA1 mutation. A combination of quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed. Of the 161 living, eligible, and locatable kindred members, 105 (65%) enrolled in the study. Family, personal, and educational motivations were the most commonly endorsed reasons for study participation. The most commonly cited reasons for refusal to participate in the study were: lack of interest, time constraints, and negative experiences with prior participation in genetic research. Eighty three percent of the participants underwent BRCA1 testing. In multiple logistic regression analysis, age 40-49 (odds ratio (OR) = 6.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.2-39.5), increased perceived risk of being a BRCA1 mutation carrier (OR = 4.1; 95% CI = 1.1-14.6), and high cancer genetics knowledge levels (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.1-2.3) were associated with BRCA1 testing acceptance. The results of this study indicate that cognitive and demographic factors may influence genetic research participation and genetic testing decisions among African Americans who are at increased risk of carrying a deleterious BRCA1 mutation.

'It's them faulty genes again': women, men and the gendered nature of genetic responsibility in prenatal blood screening

Prenatal blood tests are routinely offered to pregnant women in the UK. Male partners are tested only where a combined positive male and female test could detect fetal abnormality such as sickle cell anaemia. Little is known about the gendered nature of screening and the impact it has on lay feelings of genetic responsibility. For example, do women take exclusive 'maternal responsibility' for the fetus? How is this responsibility challenged when men are also screened? Drawing on empirical research with pregnant women and their male partners in a northern city in the UK, this paper aims to explore the gendered nature of genetic responsibility in prenatal blood screening. The paper will argue that women and men feel a sense of genetic responsibility for the fetus throughout screening. However, while women's sense of responsibility is directly 'embodied' and is heightened by the detection of 'faulty genes', men's manifests itself indirectly through shared responsibility with their pregnant partners and directly through their own genetic connections to the fetus. The paper concludes that the gendered nature of genetic responsibility is complex and contradictory, producing a set of gender roles that both challenges and reinforces a traditional gender division of labour.

Genetic testing for Lynch syndrome in the first year of colorectal cancer: a review of the psychological impact

An increasing number of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) receive genetic counselling within 1 year after diagnosis. Little is known whether specific subgroups are more vulnerable for genetic testing related distress. A literature review was conducted to identify the psychological impact of CRC in the first year, and the additional impact of genetic testing. The electronic databases of PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify all reports published between January 1997 and October 2007 on the psychological impact of (1) CRC-diagnosis up to 1 year after treatment and of (2) genetic testing for Lynch syndrome in patients with CRC. Studies on the psychological impact of genetic testing in newly diagnosed patient with CRC were not available. Either CRC patients diagnosed several years ago were studied and the focus was also often on the psychological impact of genetic testing prior to DNA-test disclosure. They show that limitations in emotional and social functioning can persist up to 1 year after CRC treatment, especially in those with a stoma or diagnosed before age 60. Female patients and male patients diagnosed before age 50 appear to be more vulnerable to genetic test-related distress. It is well known that being treated for CRC has great impact on psychological functioning. Little is known about the psychological impact during the first year after diagnosis and very little is known about the additional psychological effect of genetic testing for hereditary cancer in this period. We found presumptive evidence that specific subgroups of patients with CRC are more vulnerable for genetic-testing-related distress.

Tragedy and Grenzsituationen in genetic prediction

Philosophical anthropologies that emphasise the role of the emotions can be used to expand existing notions of moral agency and learning in situations of great moral complexity. In this article we tell the story of one patient facing the tough decision of whether to be tested for Huntington's disease or not. We then interpret her story from two different but compatible philosophical entry points: Aristotle's conception of Greek tragedy and Karl Jaspers' notion of Grenzsituationen (boundary situations). We continue by indicating some ways in which these two positions may be used for reflecting upon different perspectives involved in clinical decision-making, those of patients, clinicians and bioethicists. We conclude that the ideas we introduce can be used as hermeneutic tools for situating learning and dialogue within a broader cultural field in which literature and art may also play important roles.