Attitudes to Genetic Testing for Deafness: The Importance of Informed Choice

Should genes for non-syndromic hearing loss be included in reproductive genetic carrier screening: Views of people with a personal or family experience of deafness

Many commercial reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) panels include genes associated with non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL), however little is known about the general acceptability of their inclusion. Although some couples wish to avoid having a deaf child, there are effective interventions and supports available for deafness, and no consensus on whether it is appropriate to reproductively screen NSHL genes. This study explored views of people with personal experience of deafness regarding carrier screening for genes associated with NSHL. We interviewed 27 participants; 14 who identified as deaf and 13 hearing parents of a deaf child. Thematic analysis was undertaken on transcripts of interviews. The findings reveal the complexity of attitudes within these groups. Some vacillated between the wish to support prospective parents' reproductive autonomy and concerns about potential harms, especially the expression of negative messages about deafness and the potential loss of acceptance in society. While some participants felt carrier screening could help prospective parents to prepare for a deaf child, there was little support for reproductive screening and termination of pregnancy. Participants emphasized the need for accurate information about the lived experience of deafness. The majority felt deafness is not as severe as other conditions included in RGCS, and most do not consider deafness as a disability. People with personal experience of deafness have diverse attitudes towards RGCS for deafness informed by their own identify and experience, and many have concerns about how it should be discussed and implemented in a population wide RGCS program.

The views of people with a lived experience of deafness and the general public regarding genetic testing for deafness in the reproductive setting: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Genes associated with nonsyndromic hearing loss are commonly included in reproductive carrier screening panels, which are now routinely offered in preconception and prenatal care in many countries. However, there is debate whether hearing loss should be considered a medical condition appropriate for screening. This systematic review assessed research on opinions of those with a lived experience of deafness and the general public regarding genetic testing for deafness in the reproductive setting.

METHODS

Search of 5 online databases yielded 423 articles, 20 of which met inclusion criteria. We assessed the quality of each study, extracted data, and performed thematic analysis on qualitative studies.

RESULTS

Most studies indicated interest in the use of prenatal diagnosis for deafness. However, there were mixed views, and sometimes strongly held views, expressed regarding the reproductive options that should be available to those with an increased chance of having a child with deafness. Studies were small, from a limited number of countries, and most were too old to include views regarding preimplantation genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

There is a broad range of views regarding the use of reproductive options for deafness. Further research is essential to explore the benefits and harms of including nonsyndromic hearing loss genes in carrier screening.

Future directions for screening and treatment in congenital hearing loss

Hearing loss is the most common neurosensory deficit. It results from a variety of heritable and acquired causes and is linked to multiple deleterious effects on a child's development that can be ameliorated by prompt identification and individualized therapies. Diagnosing hearing loss in newborns is challenging, especially in mild or progressive cases, and its management requires a multidisciplinary team of healthcare providers comprising audiologists, pediatricians, otolaryngologists, and genetic counselors. While physiologic newborn hearing screening has resulted in earlier diagnosis of hearing loss than ever before, a growing body of knowledge supports the concurrent implementation of genetic and cytomegalovirus testing to offset the limitations inherent to a singular screening modality. In this review, we discuss the contemporary role of screening for hearing loss in newborns as well as future directions in its diagnosis and treatment.

Biallelic deletions of the Waardenburg II syndrome gene, SOX10, cause a recognizable arthrogryposis syndrome

Random mating in the general population tends to limit the occurrence of homozygous and compound heterozygous forms of dominant hereditary disorders. Certain phenotypes, the most recognized being skeletal dysplasias associated with short stature, lead to cultural interaction and assortative mating. To this well-known example, may be added deafness which brings together individuals with a variety of deafness genotypes, some being dominant. Waardenburg syndrome is one such autosomal dominant disorder in which affected individuals may interact culturally because of deafness. Biallelic genetic alterations for two Waardenburg genes, PAX3 and MITF have been previously recognized. Herein, we report biallelic deletions in SOX10, a gene associated with Waardenburg syndromes type II and IV. The affected fetuses have a severe phenotype with a lack of fetal movement resulting in four-limb arthrogryposis and absence of palmar and plantar creases, white hair, dystopia canthorum, and in one case cleft palate and in the other a cardiac malformation.

"My Plate is Full": Reasons for Declining a Genetic Evaluation of Hearing Loss

The aim of this study was to obtain patient and parent perspectives on genetic evaluation of hearing loss, in order to identify motivators, expectations, and barriers. Three focus groups were conducted following a semi-structured discussion guide, led by an independent moderator. Participants were hearing parents of children with permanent hearing loss or deaf adults. Qualitative content analysis was used to develop a codebook and identify major themes and subthemes. Participant views were compared to national guidelines. The 28 participants comprised 23 parents representing 21 unique families and 5 deaf adults. 13/21 families and 0/5 adults reported comorbidities, 4/21 families and 3/5 adults had a positive family history, and 12/21 families versus 0/5 adults had utilized genetics services. A common theme among adults and parents was a curiosity as to the cause of hearing loss. Parents were motivated to detect comorbidities and optimize care for hearing loss. Some parents felt overwhelmed by the hearing loss and unprepared to pursue early genetic evaluation as recommended in guidelines. Several reported positive experiences following genetics consultation, while others reported unease and unmet expectations. Notably, both parents and adults expressed ambivalence regarding the desire for genetic knowledge. Financial concerns and difficulties obtaining a referral were cited as extrinsic barriers. For parents of children with hearing loss, both the presence of comorbidities and a positive family history were drivers of genetics consultation and/or genetic testing. We identified educational opportunities for both patients and providers that would improve informed decision-making and increase access to genetic services. Consideration of the patient/family perspective and their decision-making processes, along with flexibility in the approach to genetics evaluation and its timing, will optimize both the development and implementation of guidelines.

Imagined futures: how experiential knowledge of disability affects parents' decision making about fetal abnormality

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of disability is considered key information to enable informed antenatal screening decisions by expectant parents. However, little is known about the role of experiential knowledge of disability in decisions to terminate or continue with a pregnancy diagnosed with a fetal abnormality.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the role that expectant parents' experiential knowledge of disabilities and conditions can play in real-life decisions to continue or end a pregnancy with a fetal abnormality.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of qualitative narrative interview data informed by contextual systems framework.

SETTING

Participants were recruited throughout the United Kingdom and interviewed between 2004 and 2006.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-four women and four of their male partners who had direct or indirect experience of disability or illness and who had proceeded with or ended a pregnancy diagnosed with a fetal abnormality.

FINDINGS

Most respondents recounted using their experiential knowledge of disability, whether of their unborn baby's condition or of a different condition, to try to imagine the future for their unborn child, themselves and their family when making their decision. Some, who were considering continuing their pregnancy and had little or no experience of their unborn baby's specific disability, sought out others' experiences of the condition following antenatal diagnosis.The nature of a parent's experiential knowledge did not predict whether they continued with or terminated their pregnancy.

DISCUSSION

Prospective parents may find it helpful to discuss their existing knowledge of their unborn baby's condition with health professionals who are aware of the influence this might have on parents' decisions.

Access to genetic testing and genetic counseling in vulnerable populations: the d/Deaf and hard of hearing population

Genetic testing holds great potential for preventing morbidities and mortalities for a number of diseases through early detection and effective intervention. As the number of genetic tests expand, so will public demand for these services. Therefore, it is essential to evaluate access to genetic testing and genetic services to ensure that all Canadians, including vulnerable groups, have equitable access to all forms of health care, in keeping with the mandate of the Canadian Health Act. The purpose of this paper is to examine the literature to determine if and how the Deaf community, as a vulnerable group, is at an increased risk of inequitable access to genetic services in Canada and to discuss how those who are deaf and hard of hearing are subject to the same risks. First, we define vulnerability and describe why the Deaf community, as a social group, can be considered a vulnerable group, followed by a description of the benefits of genetic testing. Second, we describe the barriers to accessing genetic testing, and how the d/Deaf and hard of hearing population experience additional barriers. Third, we examine the difficulties incorporating genetic testing into medical practice, and how this creates additional barriers to those already at risk. Finally, we discuss the steps necessary to promote equitable access to genetic testing among the d/Deaf and hard of hearing populations within Canada, and provide recommendations for further research in this topic area. Lastly, we comment on how barriers to genetic testing vary among the d/Deaf and hard of hearing is dependent upon the type of health care system available (whether public or private).

Parental attitudes toward genetic testing for prelingual deafness in China

OBJECTIVE

Recent advances in molecular biology of hearing and deafness have made genetic testing an option for deaf individuals and their families. In China, DNA microarray and other genetic testing method has been applied to rapid genetic diagnosis of non-syndromic hearing loss. However, there is no information about the interests in such testing in China. The purpose of this study is to document the attitudes of parents with normal hearing who have one or more deaf children toward diagnostic, carrier, and prenatal genetic testing for deafness.

METHODS

A structured, self-completion questionnaire was given to delegates at a conference held at Hubei Rehabilitation Research Center for Deaf Children, Wuhan, China on March 3, 2010. Of 366 surveys distributed, 290 were completed and returned.

RESULTS

Ninety-four percent of the respondents had a positive attitude toward genetic testing. Seventy-two percent stated that they were interested in genetic testing of deaf child. Of the individuals who were interested in such testing, 69% would consider having prenatal genetic testing for deafness.

CONCLUSION

The present study provided evidence of a predominantly positive attitude toward genetics. Appropriate genetic counseling can help parents to understand the risk, benefits, and limitations of genetic testing for prelingual deafness.

The ethics of abortions for fetuses with congenital abnormalities

Abortion remains a highly contentious moral issue, with the debate usually framed as a battle between the fetus's right to life and the woman's right to choose. Often overlooked in this debate is the impact of the concurrent legalization of abortion and the development of new prenatal screening tests on the birth prevalence of many inherited diseases. Most proponents of abortion support abortion for fetuses with severe congenital diseases, but there has unfortunately been, in our opinion, too little debate over the moral appropriateness of abortion for much less severe congenital conditions such as Down's syndrome, deafness, and dwarfism. Due to scientific advances, we are looking at a future in which prenatal diagnosis will be safer and more accurate, raising the specter, and the concomitant ethical concerns, of wholesale abortions. Herein, we present a reframing of the abortion debate that better encompasses these conditions and offers a more nuanced position.

Deaf adults' reasons for genetic testing depend on cultural affiliation: results from a prospective, longitudinal genetic counseling and testing study

This article examines the relationship between cultural affiliation and deaf adults' motivations for genetic testing for deafness in the first prospective, longitudinal study to examine the impact of genetic counseling and genetic testing on deaf adults and the deaf community. Participants (n = 256), classified as affiliating with hearing, Deaf, or both communities, rated interest in testing for 21 reasons covering 5 life domains. Findings suggest strong interest in testing to learn why they are deaf, but little interest in using it for decisions about a partner or having children. Culturally mediated variation was also demonstrated. Deaf and both communities groups viewed testing as useful for more life domains than the hearing community group. Deaf and both communities had similar motivations related to further exploration, understanding, or strengthening of deafness. Motivations related to "hearing" were also relevant for both communities. We conclude that cultural affiliation is an important factor for constructing motivations for genetic testing.

Examining the relationship between genetic counselors' attitudes toward deaf people and the genetic counseling session

Given the medical and cultural perspectives on deafness it is important to determine if genetic counselors' attitudes toward deaf people can affect counseling sessions for deafness genes. One hundred fifty-eight genetic counselors recruited through the National Society of Genetic Counselors Listserv completed an online survey assessing attitudes toward deaf people and scenario-specific comfort levels discussing and offering genetic testing for deafness. Respondents with deaf/Deaf friends or who work in prenatal or pediatric settings had more positive attitudes toward deaf people than those without deaf/Deaf friends or those working in 'other' settings. More positive attitudes toward deaf people correlated with higher comfort level talking about genetic testing for the two scenarios involving culturally Deaf clients; and correlated with higher comfort level offering genetic testing to culturally Deaf clients wishing to have a deaf child. Attitudes and comfort level were not correlated in the scenarios involving hearing or non-culturally deaf clients. These results suggest that genetic counselors' attitudes could affect information provision and the decision making process of culturally Deaf clients. Cultural sensitivity workshops in genetic counseling training programs that incorporate personal interactions with culturally Deaf individuals are recommended. Additional suggestions for fostering personal interactions are provided.

What do patients with hereditary deafness think of genetic studies?

OBJECTIVE

We conducted an attitude survey for patients with hearing loss (HL). The aim of this study was to investigate the opinions of patients or parents of deaf children regarding the deafness gene, genetic testing and a gene related HL.

METHOD

A questionnaire was sent to 201 individuals who visited the Department of Otolaryngology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University and who received genetic testing for HL from September 2000 to January 2006. There were 14 questions in the questionnaire that were classified into four topics related to a deafness gene and hereditary HL, genetic testing, outpatient department of medical genetics/genetic counseling, and the results of genetic testing. The study consisted of 140 respondents (70%) of 201 administered surveys.

RESULT

Before visiting our department, only 36% of the respondents were aware that a genetic factor was a cause of HL. Despite our explanation of a deafness gene and hereditary HL, 23% of 134 respondents answered that they had not received any such explanation. Furthermore, 14% of the 103 respondents who had answered that they receive the explanation, however, they did not fully understand it. Thirty-nine percent of the respondents made their own decision regarding the genetic testing, whereas 53.5% received the tests upon the advice of a physician or family member. In contrast, 91% of the respondents had a positive attitude towards other future genetic tests. The existence of the genetic outpatient department or genetic counseling has been seldom acknowledged, but upon learning of its availability, nearly one third of the respondents indicated that they would like to receive genetic counseling. Although no respondent had social and/or family problems after being informed that they had a deafness gene mutation, some respondents worried about the result.

CONCLUSION

The results of the survey suggested that the vast majority of the respondents were satisfied with genetic testing for HL and that the barriers to take the genetic test were less than expected. However, some respondents have a negative attitude towards genetic testing and counseling. Furthermore, the issue of disclosure may be burdensome to patients.

A prospective, longitudinal study of the impact of GJB2/GJB6 genetic testing on the beliefs and attitudes of parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing infants

There are limited data on the impact of incorporating genetic counseling and testing into the newborn hearing screening process. We report on results from a prospective, longitudinal study to determine the impact of genetic counseling and GJB2/GJB6 genetic testing on parental knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about genetic testing. One hundred thirty culturally hearing parents of 93 deaf or hard-of-hearing children ages 0-3 years primarily identified through newborn hearing screening received pre- and post-test genetic counseling for GJB2 and GJB6. Parents completed questionnaires following pre-test counseling, and 1- and 6-month post-test result disclosure. Results indicate that following pre-test counseling all parents perceived benefits to genetic testing. While parents who received positive results continued to perceive benefits from testing, perceived benefit declined among parents who received inconclusive or negative results. Parents did not perceive genetic testing as harmful following pre-test counseling or receipt of test results. Parents who received positive test results performed better in understanding recurrence and causation of their child's deafness and indicated greater interest in prenatal genetic testing than those who received inconclusive or negative test results. Parents felt that pediatricians and audiologists should inform parents of genetic testing availability; however, there was no consensus on timing of this discussion. Thus culturally hearing parents do not perceive genetic testing of their deaf or hard-of-hearing infants/toddlers as harmful; they feel that primary care providers should discuss genetic testing with them; and positive genetic test results with genetic counseling give rise to better understanding and perceived benefit than negative or inconclusive results.

Ethical and social implications of genetic testing for communication disorders

Advances in genetics and genomics have quickly led to clinical applications to human health which have far-reaching consequences at the individual and societal levels. These new technologies have allowed a better understanding of the genetic factors involved in a wide range of disorders. During the past decade, incredible progress has been made in the identification of genes involved in the normal process of hearing. The resulting clinical applications have presented consumers with new information and choices. Many of the same gene identification techniques are increasingly being applied to the investigation of complex disorders of speech and language. In parallel with gene identification, studies of the legal, ethical and psychosocial impacts of the clinical application of these advances and their influence on specific behaviors of individuals with communication disorders are paramount, but often lag behind. These studies will help to ensure that new technologies are introduced into clinical practice in a responsible manner.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

As a result of this activity, the participant will be able to (1) explain the differences between Mendelian and complex forms of inheritance and why these differences complicate the ethical impact of genetic testing, (2) explain how publicly funded genome research through the Human Genome Project, the International HapMap Project and others have examined the ethical, legal and social implications of genome research, (3) list some of the ethical complexities of prenatal, newborn and predictive testing for various genetic disorders and (4) discuss the importance of evidence-based practice to the development of public policy for the introduction and clinical use of genetic tests.

Parental narratives on genetic testing for children with hearing loss: A qualitative inquiry

Studies on parental attitudes towards genetic testing for hearing loss have surveyed parents of newborns with hearing loss as well as deaf and hearing adults. Although research indicates that most people have positive attitudes about genetic testing, few studies examine parental narratives about the personal implications of genetic hearing loss in their children. In this qualitative study we conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 parents whose children had been referred for, but had not yet undergone, genetic testing for hearing loss. The parents were recruited to represent a diverse range of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. Genetics and genetic testing for hearing loss were poorly understood topics. Beyond supporting or opposing genetic testing for hearing loss, parents' construction of meaning included struggles to locate responsibility (metaphysical attributions, ascription or alleviation of parental responsibility) as well as questions about the usefulness and implications of genetic testing for hearing loss in their child. Based on the themes that emerged from this study, we highlight the need for healthcare professionals to be aware and sensitized to parents' narratives, personal meanings and socio-cultural context when referring them for genetic testing for hearing loss. Listening attentively to parental narratives can help minimize prevailing misconceptions among parents and enable appropriate medical care and education.

Providing a Transcultural Genetic Counseling Service in the UK

This paper uses a broad definition of culture to explore the practice of transcultural genetic counseling through three case studies. The first case involves a White genetic counselor seeing an Asian family, the second, an Asian genetic counselor seeing an Asian family and the third, a hearing genetic counselor seeing a culturally Deaf client. Boundaries, transference and countertransference reactions are considered within each transcultural encounter and the author of each case reflects in detail on their role in the client interaction and their impact on the transcultural dynamic. The cases are used to illustrate some cultural beliefs or characteristics that may challenge the genetic counselor's expectations. The value of identifying and interpreting these differences to facilitate useful clinical work is considered. The paper debates, where possible, whether it is helpful to culturally match genetic counselor and client.

A focus group study of consumer attitudes toward genetic testing and newborn screening for deafness

PURPOSE

Progress in identifying genes for deafness together with implementation of universal audiologic screening of newborns has provided the opportunity for more widespread use of molecular tests to detect genetic forms of hearing loss. Efforts to assess consumer attitudes toward these advances have lagged behind.

METHODS

Consumer focus groups were held to explore attitudes toward genetic advances and technologies for hearing loss, views about newborn hearing screening, and reactions to the idea of adding molecular screening for hearing loss at birth. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed and analyzed.

RESULTS

Five focus groups with 44 participants including hearing parents of deaf children, deaf parents and young deaf adults were held. Focus group participants supported the use of genetic tests to identify the etiology of hearing loss but were concerned that genetic information might influence reproductive decisions. Molecular newborn screening was advocated by some; however, others expressed concern about its effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Documenting the attitudes of parents and other consumers toward genetic technologies establishes the framework for discussions on the appropriateness of molecular newborn screening for hearing loss and informs specialists about potential areas of public education necessary prior to the implementation of such screening.