Trans‐inclusive genetic counseling services: Recommendations from members of the transgender and non‐binary community

Conducting inclusive research in genetics for transgender, gender-diverse, and sex-diverse individuals: Case analyses and recommendations from a clinical genomics study

A person's phenotypic sex (i.e., endogenous expression of primary, secondary, and endocrinological sex characteristics) can impact crucial aspects of genetic assessment and resulting clinical care recommendations. In studies with genetics components, it is critical to collect phenotypic sex, information about current organ/tissue inventory and hormonal milieu, and gender identity. If researchers do not carefully construct data models, transgender, gender diverse, and sex diverse (TGSD) individuals may be given inappropriate care recommendations and/or be subjected to misgendering, inflicting medical and psychosocial harms. The recognized need for an inclusive care experience should not be limited to clinical practice but should extend to the research setting, where researchers must build an inclusive experience for TGSD participants. Here, we review three TGSD participants in the Family History and Cancer Risk Study (FOREST) to critically evaluate sex- and gender-related survey measures and associated data models in a study seeking to identify patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. Furthermore, we leverage these participants' responses to sex- and gender identity-related questions in FOREST to inform needed changes to the FOREST data model and to make recommendations for TGSD-inclusive genetics research design, data models, and processes.

Policy and laboratory practice: How quality control procedures for genetic testing perpetuate biological essentialism and discrimination against transgender, gender diverse, and intersex people

Transgender, gender diverse, and intersex (TGDI) individuals face significant health disparities due to individual and systemic experiences of discrimination, impacting their access to healthcare. While clinical genetic testing has become increasingly accessible to the general population, the field of clinical genetics perpetuates a narrative of biological essentialism, which creates barriers for TGDI patients. Biological essentialism upholds that sex is a binary, fixed, and innate characteristic, a misconception that has been historically weaponized against the TGDI community in both individual experiences of discrimination and anti-trans legislation, among other systemic forms of oppression. Rejecting this discriminatory framework requires careful consideration of, and changes to, long-established practices that often go unquestioned, such as quality control metrics in genetic testing, in order to improve TGDI patients' outcomes and access to genetic services. The sex-check, comparing an individuals reported sex against their sex chromosomes, is an example of how laboratory genetics practices reinforce the narrative that sex is determined purely by chromosomal composition. Additionally, the sex-check "outs" TGDI people in clinical settings, creating a discriminatory and unsafe environment for these patients. Alternative quality control procedures and inclusive practices, such as clearer delineation of sex and gender on test requisition forms, are proposed to improve TGDI patient experiences. Genetic counselors and other clinical providers have a responsibility to address historical discrimination and advocate for changes to laboratory practice, so as to create affirming experiences for TGDI patients.

Experiences of hereditary cancer care among transgender and gender diverse people: "It's gender. It's cancer risk…it's everything"

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals are a significant yet underrepresented population within genetic counseling research and broader LGBTQI+ health studies. This underrepresentation perpetuates a cycle of exclusion from the production of medical knowledge, impacting the quality and equity of care received by TGD individuals. This issue is particularly poignant in cancer genetic counseling, where TGD individuals with elevated cancer risk receive risk assessment, counseling, and referral to support based on risk figures and standards of care developed for cisgender individuals. The experiences of TGD individuals navigating inherited cancer syndromes remain largely undocumented in medical literature, posing challenges to the provision of inclusive care by genetics providers. To bridge this knowledge gap, we conducted a cross-sectional qualitative study. Nineteen semi-structured interviews were held with gender diverse adults having hereditary cancer syndromes, family histories of such syndromes, or personal histories of chest cancer. Our study employed thematic analysis using combined inductive and deductive methods to illuminate how hereditary cancer care intersects with participants' gender identities, gender expression, and gender-affirming care experiences. Participants reflected on care experiences that felt affirming or triggered gender dysphoria. Participants also discussed the interplay between risk-reducing mastectomy and top surgery, exploring co-emergent dynamics between cancer risk management and gender expression. Significantly, participants identified actionable strategies for healthcare providers to enhance support for gender diverse patients, including the mindful use of gendered language, collaborative decision-making, and conveying allyship. These findings offer valuable insights into tailoring genetic counseling to meet the unique needs of TGD individuals, advancing the path toward inclusive and appropriate care for LGBTQI+ individuals with hereditary cancer syndromes.

Use of gender-inclusive language in genetic counseling to optimize patient care

Providing welcoming, inclusive, and culturally competent care is essential for genetic counselors (GCs) to serve the needs of all patients, including transgender and nonbinary (TGNB) individuals. Inclusive language creates welcoming healthcare spaces and improves health outcomes for TGNB individuals. Training on gender-affirming healthcare can increase knowledge, comfort, and self-efficacy working with TGNB patients. Using a mixed-method survey, this study assessed 65 GCs' gender-inclusive communication practices and elucidated reasons for discomfort using language to determine how language builds trust and fosters patient-provider relationships, ascertain differences between specialties, and identify potential gaps in education and professional development. This study found that approximately one-third of GCs are comfortable using gender-inclusive language and just over half regularly use it with patients. Most GCs do not share their pronouns or ask patients theirs, which was not correlated with comfort levels or frequency of using gender-inclusive language. There were no significant differences based on specialty. Thematic analysis of open responses revealed GCs used gendered language to promote shared language and for clarity, some mentioning sex assigned at birth was relevant for risk assessment. Most felt the impact of gendered language depended on the patient's perspective. Twenty-five percent noted gendered language was familiar for most patients and 40% recognized negative impacts on TGNB individuals. Most GCs desired more gender-inclusivity training even though >95% had some type previously. Those who had gender-inclusivity training in their genetic counseling program were more comfortable using gender-inclusive language and were more likely to share their pronouns with patients. This study adds to the growing body of literature demonstrating GCs' desire for more gender-inclusivity education and highlights the potential importance of having this education integrated into genetic counseling training programs. GCs should continue to incorporate gender-inclusive language into their practice in concordance with the tenants of the Reciprocal Engagement Model.

Transgender and gender diverse individuals' perspectives on discussions of fetal sex chromosomes in obstetrics care

In the past decade, prenatal cell-free DNA screening (cfDNA) has become ubiquitous as a screening tool for fetal aneuploidy and sex chromosomes. Healthcare provider (HCP) discussions and public perceptions of sex and gender uniquely impact transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals, and existing cfDNA guidelines lack recommendations regarding how to discuss sex and gender prenatally. The aim of this exploratory qualitative study was to examine TGD individuals' opinions regarding fetal sex chromosome disclosure sessions. Twelve semi-structured virtual interviews were conducted with TGD individuals regarding their perspectives on the discussion of fetal sex chromosomes by HCPs within the prenatal setting. Interviews were coded and analyzed using a reflexive thematic approach, generating four major themes: (1) Current practices in prenatal care exclude gender diverse people; (2) HCPs' responsibility to de-gender discussions of sex chromosomes in prenatal care; (3) HCPs' responsibility to acknowledge gender diversity; and (4) HCPs' influence on societal perceptions of sex and gender. More guidance is needed from professional societies regarding best practices for HCP discussions of sex chromosomes, sex, and gender. Participants recommended HCPs educate patients about sex chromosomes and their relevance to health while avoiding the conflation of sex and gender terms. Additionally, there is an acute need for trans-inclusive prenatal healthcare. Ultimately, HCPs' and organizations are in a prime position to deconstruct rigid gender binaries and promote societal inclusion of TGD people.

The need for an intersectionality framework in precision medicine research

Precision medicine research has seen growing efforts to increase participation of communities that have been historically underrepresented in biomedical research. Marginalized racial and ethnic communities have received particular attention, toward the goal of improving the generalizability of scientific knowledge and promoting health equity. Against this backdrop, research has highlighted three key issues that could impede the promise of precision medicine research: issues surrounding (dis)trust and representation, challenges in translational efforts to improve health outcomes, and the need for responsive community engagement. Existing efforts to address these challenges have predominantly centered on single-dimensional demographic criteria such as race, ethnicity, or sex, while overlooking how these and additional variables, such as disability, gender identity, and socioeconomic factors, can confound and jointly impact research participation. We argue that increasing cohort diversity and the responsiveness of precision medicine research studies to community needs requires an approach that transcends conventional boundaries and embraces a more nuanced, multi-layered, and intersectional framework for data collection, analyses, and implementation. We draw attention to gaps in existing work, highlight how overlapping layers of marginalization might shape and substantiate one another and affect the precision-medicine research cycle, and put forth strategies to facilitate equitable advantages from precision-medicine research to diverse participants and internally heterogeneous communities.

Genetic counseling for fetal sex prediction by NIPT: Challenges and opportunities

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has grown in ubiquity in the last decade and is now endorsed by Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as a screening tool for aneuploidy in all patients. Past studies have demonstrated a tendency among obstetrics patients to focus on the ability of NIPT to predict fetal sex chromosomes; however, data on the experiences of genetic counselors (GCs) counseling on NIPT and fetal sex prediction are limited. This mixed-methods study aimed to explore how GCs counsel about NIPT and fetal sex prediction, as well as the use of gender-inclusive language in this setting. A 36-item survey with multiple choice, Likert scale, and open-ended questions was distributed to GCs who currently offer NIPT to patients. Quantitative data were analyzed using R and qualitative data were manually analyzed and coded via inductive content analysis. A total of 147 individuals completed at least some portion of the survey. A majority of participants (68.5%) reported frequent interchangeable use of the terms 'sex' and 'gender' by patients. A majority (72.9%) of participants reported that they rarely or never discuss the difference between these terms in sessions (Spearman's rho = 0.17, p = 0.052). Seventy-five respondents (59.5%) indicated that they had taken continuing education courses on inclusive clinical practices for trans and gender-diverse (TGD) patients. Several themes arose from free responses; the most frequently identified themes were the need for thorough pretest counseling that properly describes the scope of NIPT and the challenge of discrepant pretest counseling by other healthcare providers. Results from our research identified challenges and misconceptions GCs face when offering NIPT and various tactics implemented to mitigate these. Our study highlighted the need for the standardization of pretest counseling regarding NIPT, additional guidance from professional organizations, and continuing education focused on gender-inclusive language and clinical practices.

Words matter: The language of difference in human genetics

Diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in academia are leading publishers and journals to re-examine their use of terminology for commonly used scientific variables. This reassessment of language is particularly important for human genetics, which is focused on identifying and explaining differences between individuals and populations. Recent guidance on the use of terms and symbols in clinical practice, research, and publications is beginning to acknowledge the ways that language and concepts of difference can be not only inaccurate but also harmful. To stop perpetuating historical wrongs, those of us who conduct and publish genetic research and provide genetic health care must understand the context of the terms we use and why some usages should be discontinued. In this article, we summarize critiques of terminology describing disability, sex, gender, race, ethnicity, and ancestry in research publications, laboratory reports, diagnostic codes, and pedigrees. We also highlight recommendations for alternative language that aims to make genetics more inclusive, rigorous, and ethically sound. Even though norms of acceptable language use are ever changing, it is the responsibility of genetics professionals to uncover biases ingrained in professional practice and training and to continually reassess the words we use to describe human difference because they cause harm to patients.

Disclosure and comfort during genetic counseling sessions with LGBTQ+ patients: An updated assessment

Disclosure is the act of sharing a stigmatized identity, and members of the LGBTQ+ community make decisions related to disclosure multiple times throughout their life. Disclosure in medical settings can impact perceptions of care and outcomes for LGBTQ+ patients; however, little is understood about the process of decision-making regarding disclosure in the genetic counseling setting. As such, this study aimed to explore LGBTQ+ experiences in genetic counseling sessions and their disclosure behaviors. Fifty-five LGBTQ+ individuals who attended a genetic counseling session and 91 genetic counselors completed online surveys. The patient survey assessed for disclosure behaviors, experiences of discrimination, and comfort in genetic counseling sessions. The counselor survey evaluated comfort with the LGBTQ+ population in a counseling setting, whether counselors facilitate disclosure in sessions, and whether counseling is tailored for the LGBTQ+ population. Eighty-two percent of genetic counselors "rarely" or "never" ask about sexual orientation, and 69% "rarely" or "never" ask about gender identity. The majority of patients indicated they were not asked about their sexual orientation (87%) or gender identity (80%). Some patients reported experiencing discrimination or homo/transphobia in their genetic counseling sessions, with 6.12% of LGBQ+ patients experiencing discrimination and 24.1% of trans+ patients reporting discrimination. Over half of genetic counselors reported receiving training in LGBTQ+ healthcare and the majority reported comfort with providing care to LGBTQ+ patients. However, discrepancies between patient-reported experiences and genetic counselors' descriptions of their care for the LGBTQ+ population warrant further research and suggest additional training or changes in practice may be necessary.

Practice resource-focused revision: Standardized pedigree nomenclature update centered on sex and gender inclusivity: A practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

This focused revision builds on the expert opinions from the original publications of 'Recommendations for human standardized pedigree nomenclature' published in 1995 and updated in 2008. Our review of medical publications since 2008 did not identify any fundamental systematic alternative pedigree nomenclature. These findings attest to the relevance of most of the nomenclature with the critical exception of the nomenclature used to denote sex assigned at birth and gender. While we are not recommending the creation of any new pedigree symbols, a major focus of this publication is clarification of the use of symbols and language in the description of the distinction between sex and gender, with a view to ensuring safe and inclusive practice for people who are gender-diverse or transgender. In addition, we recommend modifications to the way that carrier status is depicted. Our goal is to respect individual differences and identities while maintaining biologically, clinically, and genetically meaningful information.

Considerations for the use of qualitative methodologies in genetic counseling research

An abundance of qualitative research is being conducted within the genetic counseling field. As this area of research expands, many within our community are "learning through doing", an approach which is practical, but may lack theoretical grounding. This can result in study outputs that do not have the sort of utility for informing clinical practice that is the hallmark of excellent clinical qualitative research. Furthermore, our alignment as a discipline within the health sciences, which still tends to favor quantitative approaches, means that we may often be obliged to justify the use of qualitative methodologies, especially when we intend to use the findings for informing clinical practice. We aim to address these issues by providing guidance about how we, individually and collectively, might think about what excellent qualitative research can look like in our field. In addition to providing information and resources about current best-practices, we discuss how quality can be ensured and evaluated. We seek to legitimize the idea of developing a philosophy of research in pursuit of establishing genetic counseling as an academic discipline. We argue that the principles, ethics, values, and practices of genetic counseling are sufficiently unique that establishing a discipline-specific qualitative research framework is not only warranted, but essential. Ultimately, we hope that this paper can serve as a launching point from which additional discussion about qualitative research can emanate as we strive towards the elevation of this form of inquiry in our field.

Improving gender-affirming care in genetic counseling: Using educational tools that amplify transgender and/or gender non-binary community voices

Transgender and/or gender non-binary (TGNB) individuals face significant health care disparities, including deficiencies in provider knowledge. To address this knowledge gap for genetic counselors, we developed, implemented, and analyzed an educational intervention on gender-affirming genetic counseling (GC) and care for TGNB patients. In partnership with the TGNB community, we designed a 5-module (length = 146 min ± 94 min) genetic counseling-targeted online learning program focused on gender-affirming care (Amplify). Content included elements of gender-affirming care, core components of gender-inclusive GC sessions, and cancer risk assessment/management. Video testimonials featuring TGNB individuals complemented learning within each module. Educational outcomes measured included comfort working with TGNB patients (n = 2 multiple choice questions (MCQs)), impact of education on knowledge (n = 25 MCQs), and clinical self-efficacy based on the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling competencies (n = 35 skills). Participants (n = 40), recruited through state and national GC organizations, completed all modules, and pre- and post-education/self-efficacy assessments. Pre-Amplify, 65% (n = 26/40) of participants endorsed feeling 'somewhat comfortable' working with TGNB patients. The average knowledge score was 77.6% (SD = 11.2%) with the lowest scores related to the gender affirmation process. After Amplify, overall knowledge improvement was statistically significant with an average 16.9% (p < 0.001) increase in score. Pre-Amplify, the average self-efficacy score was 78.4% (SD = 15.8%) with lowest scores seen in statements surrounding information gathering of family and medical histories. Post-Amplify, overall self-efficacy improvement was statistically significant with an average 13.8% (p < 0.001) increase in score. Linear regression did not identify an impact of practice specialty on participants' knowledge gains or self-efficacy. This study shows online modules are an effective form of gender-affirming care education for GCs. This intervention can positively improve the care practicing genetic counselors provide to patients and inform future decision-making about the development of gender-affirming care education for genetic counselors.

Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals' perspectives on research seeking genetic variants associated with TGD identities: a qualitative study

Recent genetic research has explored how genetic variants may contribute to gender dysphoria and transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) identities. When investigating communities that have been marginalized, it is important for researchers to incorporate perspectives of the communities the research is targeting. Therefore, investigators should incorporate the TGD community's opinions into this research to mitigate potential ethical issues, given the history of pathologization of TGD identities and utilization of genetics for eugenics. The aim of this study was to understand the perspectives of TGD individuals about trans-associated genetic research (TAGR). Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the TGD community to explore how TGD individuals view TAGR. Through inductive content analysis, five major themes were emergent: (1) TAGR could affect self-perception of identity; (2) TAGR could affect external views of TGD people; (3) TAGR could affect access to gender-affirming services; (4) TAGR could contribute to the pathologization and elimination of TGD identities; and (5) researchers should consult TGD community members and consider ethical concerns before conducting research. Participants highlighted concerns about TAGR being used as a tool for discrimination. Those who identified potential advantages of TAGR gave warning that TAGR would be unlikely to solely have positive effects. It is important for genetic researchers to prioritize the perspectives and concerns of TGD people highlighted in this study. Research about the TGD community needs to include TGD individuals as core members of the research team. Moreover, due to the serious ethical issues outlined in this study, TAGR should be reconsidered altogether.

Transgender patients' perspectives on their cancer genetic counseling experiences

Transgender (trans) individuals face many forms of discrimination in accessing health care, including lack of provider knowledge and denial of services. Barriers specific to the cancer setting include limited availability of information concerning cancer management and its potential impact on gender affirmation therapies and minimal training for providers regarding inclusive practices for the trans population. The limited research about the experiences of cancer genetic counseling for trans patients has investigated exclusively the perspective of the provider, not the patient. This constructivist grounded theory study sought to fill this gap in the literature by interviewing trans individuals who had undergone cancer genetic counseling. Participants were recruited through social media platforms, LGBTQ+ advocacy and cancer support groups, and the National Society of Genetic Counselors' list serv. Six semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants focusing on their expectations and goals prior to the genetic counseling session, concerns during the session, and reflections on inclusive practices. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a constant comparative approach and five themes emerged: (a) Anxiety for the consult, (b) Disruptions of familial relationships and emotional support systems, (c) Use of inclusive language during session, (d) Impact on gender affirmation journey, and (e) Lack of appropriate cancer risk information for trans patients. The results from this pilot study suggest that trans patients experience anticipatory anxiety before the genetic counseling appointment, particularly about the potential of a physical examination. They may be more likely to experience disrupted family relationships that impact access to family history information and support. Genetic counselors should utilize inclusive language both when referring to the patient and when discussing cancer risk. Finally, additional research is needed to provide more accurate cancer risk predictions for trans individuals.

Trans-affirming care: An integrative review and concept analysis

BACKGROUND

Contemporary healthcare exists within a cisnormative landscape which underpins the erasure of trans persons in healthcare, health research, and health education, and results in negative experiences and poorer outcomes. Further, nurses report feeling inadequately prepared to provide affirming care to trans patients, with little guidance available to inform their practice.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the conceptual understanding of trans-affirming care as it pertains to nursing, and to provide recommendations for trans-affirming nursing care at the systemic, organizational, and individual level.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was completed using standard review processes. Two reviewers independently applied a two-step study selection procedure to identify eligible citations. Walker and Avant's concept analysis method was used to analyze the extracted data to determine antecedents, defining attributes, empirical referents, and consequences.

RESULTS

Of the 5914 studies, 136 met criteria, representing a variety of clinical settings. The antecedents identified were depathologization of gender variance and cultural humility. The defining attributes were patient-led care, trans-affirming culture, and trans-competent providers. The consequences were improved psychological and physical health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Trans persons and communities are becoming more visible in society, as are their testimonials about their substandard treatment within healthcare systems. Nurses need to respond to these health inequities with self-reflection, advocacy, and education. At the center of this work is the concept of trans-affirming care, which is a philosophy of care specific to trans persons. Tweetable abstract: This article offers an evidence-informed definition of trans-affirming care and recommendations for how it can be operationalized by nurses.

Genetic counselors' experiences with transgender individuals in prenatal and preconception settings

Many transgender individuals want to have children and are pursuing reproductive care. Limited research has described the experiences of transgender individuals during pregnancy, and no known studies have examined reproductive genetic counseling sessions with this patient population. To understand what topics and considerations are explored within this sector of reproductive care, prenatal and preconception genetic counselors that have seen a transgender patient and/or transgender partner of a patient were recruited through an email blast to members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. Nine genetic counselors completed phone interviews. Content analysis was used to identify, quantify, and examine the concepts within the transcripts. Six major themes emerged: (1) Trans individuals were referred for common genetic counseling indications, (2) genetic counselors were driven to think of more inclusive language, (3) genetic counselors considered ways to make written materials more inclusive, (4) trans individuals expressed discomforts in the prenatal/preconception setting, (5) genetic counselors observed challenges with the care team, and (6) genetic counselors felt underprepared. This study identifies areas within reproductive spaces of genetic counseling that could be more inclusive, particularly relating to commonly used gendered language and written materials, and provides training recommendations for genetic counselors. Additionally, we outline the reported areas of discrimination for these patients and partners, and discuss ways that genetic counselors can be advocates for respectful and equitable care within their clinics.

Considerations in genetic counseling of transgender patients: Cultural competencies and altered disease risk profiles

Transgender people are a growing population with specific healthcare needs, barriers to care, and disease risk factors. Cultural competencies for working with transgender people in healthcare settings are essential to reduce barriers to care and combat the associated health disparities. Genetic counselors support their patients to understand and manage medically and personally complex life events and decisions. A genetic counselor caring for a transgender patient or a patient with a transgender relative will therefore require specific cultural competencies and medical knowledge that may not have been covered in their training. Transgender health is also a relatively young field in which new insights may quickly become fundamental. The present paper therefore provides an overview of current best practices for culturally sensitive working with transgender patients, and an introduction to the additional considerations for assessment of disease risk in transgender people. Guidance on how to ensure communication with patients and other stakeholders is inclusive and affirming of transgender identities, is offered. Medical interventions used for gender transitions are described, and their (potential) effects on cancer and cardiovascular disease risk are discussed. Furthermore, the effects of sociocultural risk factors such as minority stress are outlined. In sum, we invite the reader to consider the specific biological, psychological, and social context of the consultation. Finally, we explore culturally competent approaches to pedigree charting and physical examinations with transgender people and provide recommendations for practice.

Creating Affirmative and Inclusive Practices When Providing Genetic and Genomic Diagnostic and Research Services to Gender-Expansive and Transgender Patients

BACKGROUND

Gender expansive and transgender (GET) healthcare extends beyond gender-affirming therapies, reaching every medical specialty and subspecialty. As the number of GET patients seeking health services has increased, so has the need for standards of care regarding GET-affirmative practices throughout the healthcare system. As such, the number of publications surrounding GET-affirmative practices has steadily risen. However, even as such research has gained ground in other areas, one realm in which there has been a relative lag is genetics and genomics (GG).

CONTENT

In this article, we track the GET patient and their laboratory sample from the clinic to the GG laboratory and back. Throughout the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical phases, we identify publications, recommendations, and guidelines relevant to the care of the GET community. We also identity knowledge gaps in each area and provide recommendations for affirmative and inclusive processes for addressing those gaps.

SUMMARY

We have identified the practices involved in GG services that would benefit from GET-affirmative process improvement, reviewing relevant affirmative guidelines. Where guidelines could not be found, we identified those knowledge gaps and suggested potential solutions and future directions for implementing GET-affirmative practices.

Assessing transgender and gender non-conforming pedigree nomenclature in current genetic counselors' practice: The case for geometric inclusivity

Healthcare professionals rely on national organizations for guidance; the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have differing guidelines for acceptable pedigree symbols to represent transgender patients and minimal recommendations for gender non-conforming (GNC) patients. Inconsistency in accepted pedigree symbols to represent these patients is a barrier to providing them appropriate care. We assess variability in pedigree practice among genetic counselors and students, as well as reported education on serving the needs of the transgender and GNC communities, through a survey distributed through NSGC. Participants felt symbols similar to NSGC's (41.1%) and NCCN's (29.7%) recommendations for transgender patients are appropriate and emphasized a desire to affirm gender identity. We identified greater variability in symbols representing a GNC patient; 19.2% of participants selected 'other', explaining they were unsure of the appropriate choice. A high interest (99%) in further training demonstrates a recognition of education as an effective strategy for improving awareness and competency. Promotion of existing resources could help address the fact that 81% of participants were unaware of any standardized symbols used to represent transgender individuals. Creating affirming, standardized pedigree nomenclature is necessary for appropriate and consistent care.