The relationship of nondirectiveness to genetic counseling: report of a workshop at the 2003 NSGC Annual Education Conference

Attitudes Towards Non-directiveness Among Medical Geneticists in Germany and Switzerland

The principle of non-directiveness remains an important tenet in genetics. However, the concept has encountered growing criticism over the last two decades. There is an ongoing discussion about its appropriateness for specific situations in genetics, especially in light of recent significant advancements in genetic medicine. Despite the debate surrounding non-directiveness, there is a notable lack of up-to-date international research empirically investigating the issue from the perspective of those who actually do genetic counselling. Addressing this gap, our article delves into the viewpoints and experiences of medical geneticists in Germany and Switzerland. Twenty qualitative interviews were analysed employing reflexive thematic analysis. Participants' responses revealed substantial uncertainties and divergences in their understanding and application of the concept. It seems to cause distress since many geneticists stated that the principle was difficult to put into clinical practice and was no longer ethically justified given the increasing likelihood of therapeutic implications resulting from genomic testing outcomes. The insights provided by our qualitative empirical study accord with the ongoing theoretical debate regarding the definition, legitimacy, and feasibility of the principle. An adequately nuanced understanding and application of non-directiveness seems crucial to circumvent the risks inherent in the principle, while promoting patient autonomy and beneficence.

The principle of nondirectiveness in genetic counseling. Different meanings and various postulates of normative nature

The article aims at organizing multifaceted discourse on the concept of nondirectiveness in the practice of genetic counseling. The analysis of areas where nondirectiveness was invoked and discussed reveals the problematic confusion of different meanings of the term that often leads to false conclusions about the relations between the professional standards and the practice of genetic counseling. The article offers clear and comprehensive description of different approaches to nondirectiveness and various ideas associated with the term. Normative consequences of various meanings attributed to nondirectiveness are explored. The article concludes by presenting important but unsolved problems regarding both theory (the meaning of nondirectiveness and its operational definition) and practice of genetic counseling (the scope and content of the norm of nondirective counseling).

Examining clinical training through a bicultural lens: Experiences of genetic counseling students who identify with a racial or ethnic minority group

Biculturals are individuals who have had significant exposure to more than one culture and who possess more than one cultural frame of reference. In the United States, this term has been used to describe both immigrants and members of racial or ethnic minority groups who live within the majority white culture. Biculturals develop a distinct repertoire of social and cognitive skills and have been shown to engage in a process of cultural frame switching in response to salient cultural cues. Through a conceptual lens offered by current research on biculturalism, this article examines transcripts of focus groups we collected for a study on the clinical training experiences of genetic counseling students who identify with a racial or ethnic minority group. We conducted a constructivist grounded theory study, collecting data via 13 videoconference focus groups with 32 recent graduates of genetic counseling training programs who identify with a racial or ethnic minority group. We focus here on two of the thematic categories identified in that study related to participants’ experiences interacting with patients during supervised clinical rotations. We find three ways in which being bicultural influenced these genetic counselors’ patient interactions. First, participants described interactions with both culturally concordant and culturally discordant patients that highlighted the salience of their racial, ethnic, or cultural identity in these encounters. Second, they reported sensitivity to social nuances between and within cultures, reflecting the findings of prior research about heightened cultural awareness in biculturals. Third, they described switching cultural frames in response to their patients’ identities which, at times, created conflict between their professional and culturally concordant frameworks. The results of this study suggest that the influence of a student's racial, ethnic, or cultural identity on interactions with patients should be discussed within the supervisory relationship, and that being bicultural confers advantages in learning to provide culturally responsive care.

Conscience clauses in genetic counseling: Awareness and attitudes

Conscience clauses are laws that allow healthcare providers to refuse to participate in legal medical services based on moral or ethical objections. Genetic counselors encounter a variety of ethical and moral issues, including counseling about abortions. Currently, three states (Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Virginia) have genetic counseling conscience clause laws that allow genetic counselors to refuse to counsel about abortions. Conscience clause laws applying to physicians and pharmacists have been studied; however, they have not been studied in genetic counseling to date. We conducted an exploratory study assessing conscience clause awareness, attitudes, perceived obligations if utilizing a conscience clause, and alignment with the National Society of Genetic Counseling (NSGC) Code of Ethics. Genetic counselors (n = 274) currently practicing in the United States completed an online survey recruited through the NSGC listserv. The majority of participants were not aware that conscience clauses exist for genetic counseling (90%). There was uncertainty about whether genetic counselors had the right to utilize a conscience clause in practice (24% said yes, 31% said no, and 45% were unsure/needed more information). The majority reported an obligation to refer a patient if implementing a conscience clause (90%), although there were discrepancies among what constitutes an appropriate referral. When asked about the interaction between conscience clauses and the NSGC Code of Ethics, 45% believe they are separate and one does not supersede the other, 31% felt the Code of Ethics supersedes, 8% felt conscience clauses supersede, and 16% were unsure. Our study shows overall uncertainty with how conscience clause laws may be applied in clinical practice. Further clarity and education, especially in states where these laws exist, is critical to navigate the interaction between conscience clause laws and genetic counseling practice.

Old Challenges or New Issues? Genetic Health Professionals' Experiences Obtaining Informed Consent in Diagnostic Genomic Sequencing

Background

While integrating genomic sequencing into clinical care carries clear medical benefits, it also raises difficult ethical questions. Compared to traditional sequencing technologies, genomic sequencing and analysis is more likely to identify unsolicited findings (UF) and variants that cannot be classified as benign or disease-causing (variants of uncertain significance; VUS). UF and VUS pose new challenges for genetic health professionals (GHPs) who are obtaining informed consent for genomic sequencing from patients.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 31 GHPs across Europe, Australia and Canada to identify some of these challenges.

Results

Our results show that GHPs find it difficult to prepare patients to receive results because a vast amount of information is required to fully inform patients about VUS and UF. GHPs also struggle to engage patients – many of whom may be focused on ending their ‘diagnostic odyssey’ – in the informed consent process in a meaningful way. Thus, some questioned how ‘informed’ patients actually are when they agree to undergo clinical genomic sequencing.

Conclusions

These findings suggest a tension remains between sufficient information provision at the risk of overwhelming the patient and imparting less information at the risk of uninformed decision-making. We suggest that a shift away from ‘fully informed consent’ toward an approach aimed at realizing, as far as possible, the underlying goals that informed consent is meant to promote.

Re-examining the Ethics of Genetic Counselling in the Genomic Era

Respect for patient autonomy has served as the dominant ethical principle of genetic counselling, but as we move into a genomic era, it is time to actively re-examine the role that this principle plays in genetic counselling practice. In this paper, we argue that the field of genetic counselling should move away from its emphasis on patient autonomy and toward the incorporation of a more balanced set of principles that allows counsellors to offer clear guidance about how best to obtain or use genetic information. We begin with a brief history of how respect for patient autonomy gained such emphasis in the field and how it has taken on various manifestations over time, including the problematic concept of nondirectiveness. After acknowledging the field's preliminary move away from nondirectiveness, we turn to a series of arguments about why the continued dominance of patient autonomy has become untenable given the arrival of the genomic era. To conclude, we describe how a more complete set of bioethical principles can be adapted and used by genetic counsellors to strengthen their practice without undermining patient autonomy.

Who we are, what we do, and how we add value: The role of the genetic counseling 'philosophy of practice' statement in a changing time

As genetics and genomics are integrated into health care and non-genetic health professionals deliver aspects of genetic counseling, it is increasingly important for genetic counselors to be able to define who we are, what we do, and how we add value to client interactions, both on an individual and professional basis. In this paper, we argue that to understand ourselves as individual practitioners and as a profession, we each need to reflect on, write, and constantly review our own philosophy of practice. A philosophy of practice is a dynamic, personal, and reflective statement or narrative that captures the core ideas, values, and beliefs of the individual about their chosen profession, including concrete examples of what this involves in practice. Here, we consider the nature, purpose, and relevance of a philosophy of genetic counseling practice, drawing on examples from professions such as teaching and nursing, where the exercise of writing a philosophy of practice is more established. We demonstrate how and why we have introduced writing a philosophy of practice into our Master of Genetic Counseling program at University of Technology Sydney and consider the possibilities for introducing such practice into professional registration or certification processes. Finally, we offer our own philosophy of genetic counseling practice as an example. As the roles and scope of practice for genetic counselors expand and diversify, it is increasingly important to understand, own, and retain our core values and principles as individual practitioners and as a profession. Ensuring client-centered practice remains at the heart of genetic health care is vital. We encourage all genetic counselors to write, publish, and share their philosophy of practice, adding to our collective professional identity in this time of change and opportunity.

Lifestyle Risk Factors Among People Who Have Had Cancer Genetic Testing

Hereditary cancer genetic counseling often focuses on medically intensive risk-reduction strategies, like imaging and risk-reducing surgeries. Lifestyle factors also influence cancer risk, but health behavior counseling is not common in genetic counseling. Information about typical lifestyle risk factors among patients seeking hereditary cancer risk is sparse. The current study describes cancer risk-relevant lifestyle factors for people who have had cancer genetic testing. Data came from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 4) collected in 2013. Analytic variables represented American Cancer Society nutrition and physical activity guidelines. Lifestyle factors were assessed for people who had undergone testing for BRCA1, BRCA2, or Lynch Syndrome genes. Among 3016 HINTS respondents, 135 had cancer genetic testing. Of these, 58 % were overweight or obese. Eighteen percent reported no moderate-intensity physical activity. Average sedentary screen-time was 3.4 h (SE = 0.472) daily. Sixty-three percent drank non-diet soda, and 23 % of these people drank soda every day. Between 18 and 36 % consumed less than 2 ½ cups fruits/vegetables daily. Twenty-four percent were current smokers. Lifestyle risk factors were not different between people who had genetic testing and those who had not. In conclusion, most people who had genetic testing for cancer susceptibility have at least one modifiable risk factor. Genetic counselors have opportunities to impact a counselee's cancer risk not only through risk-tailored medical procedures, but also through lifestyle modification recommendations. Results of the current study may foster a broader discussion of genetic counselors' roles in healthy lifestyle education.

'And then you can decide'--antenatal foetal diagnosis decision making in South Africa

BACKGROUND

Decision making is integral to genetic counselling and the premise is that autonomous decisions emerge if patients are provided with information in a non-directive manner. The pivotal activity in antenatal diagnosis counselling with at-risk pregnant women is decision making regarding invasive procedures. This process is not well understood in multicultural settings.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined multicultural genetic counselling interactions with women of advanced maternal age (AMA). It aimed to investigate the participants' orientation towards the amniocentesis decision.

DESIGN

Data were collected during 14 video-recorded consultations between six genetic counsellors and 14 women of AMA in a genetic counselling clinic in South Africa. The design was qualitative and conversation analysis was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed that counsellors used several strategies to facilitate discussions and decision making. However, the invitation to make a decision regarding amniocentesis was not perceived as being neutral. Both the counsellors and the women appeared to treat the offer as one which should be accepted. This resulted in a paradox, as strategies intended to allow neutral discussion seem to achieve the opposite. It is suggested that these results may be linked to the local health-care setting.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the understanding of decision-making processes and enhancing autonomy may require a more detailed investigation into psychosocial, political and historical factors in the local health-care setting. Models of practice as well as the training of genetic counsellors need to be sensitive to these influences. A closer examination of interactional variables may yield new and relevant insights for the profession.

Portrait of the Master Genetic Counselor Clinician: A Qualitative Investigation of Expertise in Genetic Counseling

This study comprises an initial empirical description of personal and professional characteristics of master genetic counselors-those considered to be experts in the profession. Fifteen peer-nominated genetic counselors, actively engaged in providing clinical services to patients, participated in semi-structured telephone interviews exploring their personal qualities, inspirations, and perspectives on professional development of expertise. Analysis using modified Consensual Qualitative Research methods yielded 7 domains and 33 categories. Findings indicate master genetic counselors have a strong passion for and dynamic commitment to the profession. They also have insatiable curiosity and are life-long learners who are reflective, self-aware, confident, and recognize their limitations. They are authentic and genuine, and consider their personality to be their counseling style. They form collaborative and interactive relationships with patients based on trust, and they have nuanced attunement to the complexity and multiple levels of the counseling process. Master genetic counselors have deep empathy and are inspired by patients and colleagues, and they derive personal meaning from their work. They are affected emotionally by their work, but effectively manage the emotional impact. They view their professional development as ongoing, influenced by colleagues, patients, mentoring, multicultural considerations, and their own family of origin. They also believe professional development of expertise occurs through critical reflection upon the experiences one accrues. Additional findings and their relationship to theory and research, study strengths and limitations, implication for training and practice, and research recommendation are discussed.

Analyzing communication in genetic consultations--a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review studies that have analyzed communication within medical consultations involving genetic specialists and report on their findings and design.

METHODS

Drawing from PRISMA and appropriate guidelines for reviewing qualitative research, a systematic search of seven databases was conducted, followed by selection of studies for inclusion based on a set of criteria. Three authors conducted data extraction and narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were identified and were heterogeneous in setting, design, and methods, with many including limited descriptions of health professionals involved. Despite this variability, studies generally pursued the following three main objectives: searching for structural patterns within consultations, investigating communication and genetic counseling concepts, and linking process with input- and outcome-measures. Structural patterns identified included clinician dialog dominating consultations, and talk being mostly biomedical. Counseling and communication concepts investigated were: risk communication, the negotiation of power and knowledge, and adherence to genetic counseling ideals. Attempts to link consultation data to input- or outcome-measures were often unsuccessful.

CONCLUSION

More interdisciplinary research, grounded in appropriate theoretical frameworks, is needed to explore inherent complexities in this setting.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings from this review can be used to guide the design of future research into the process of genetic consultations.

A survey of genetic counselors about the needs of 18-25 year olds from families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome

As a result of modern treatments, the life of women who test positive for BRCA mutations may be plotted along the arc of preventive medicine rather than the slope of diagnostics. Despite evidence supporting the benefits of risk reduction, protocols for early detection and prevention among women from families affected by hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) are not yet proven, and clinical trials have not been undertaken for patients aged 18 to 25. The absence of psychosocial data may leave genetic counselors without uniform guidance on how to manage the care of these patients. This project sought to investigate perspectives on counseling 18-25 year-old patients from families with hereditary cancer syndromes, with specific emphasis on HBOC, given their unique developmental, familial, and medical challenges. Certified genetic counselors were recruited through the NSGC's Cancer Genetics Special Interest Group listserv. Researchers constructed an online survey which included 41 items and elicited information about: counselor demographics, training, and practice settings; approaches to cancer risk assessment; and common challenges in work with 18- to 25-year-old patients. The survey was also informed by previous work by researchers with 18 to 25-year-olds with BRCA gene mutations. Eighty-six surveys were completed. Researchers used a combination of grounded theory and content analysis for open-ended responses, supported and triangulated with statistical analysis to maximize the interpretation of data. Genetic counselors who responded to this survey experience 18-25 year old patients presenting for cancer risk assessment differently than older patients, and some reported adapting their counseling style to address these differences. Respondents differed in the extent to which they felt well-versed in the developmental needs of patients in this age group. Respondents aged 39 and under reported feeling familiar with this stage in life, having more recently completed it; respondents aged 40 and over reported they were less familiar with, and more interested in learning about, this age group. A primary challenge in cancer risk assessment of these patients, reported primarily by counselors aged 39 and under, is navigating family dynamics in counseling sessions and addressing the developmentally labile young adult. With respect to BRCA-related cancer risk, where penetrance is incomplete, onset in early adulthood is rare. Evidence-based treatment/prevention options exist, but providers may not have clarity regarding how or when to provide directive counsel. A rich understanding of the themes inherent in how people grow and change over time might enhance the counselor's capacity to assess patients and their family members. The integration of a developmental approach to genetic counseling has the potential to reduce the imperative for non-directive counseling.

An exploration of genetic counselors' needs and experiences with prenatal chromosomal microarray testing

Because of the higher yield over traditional chromosomal analysis, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is being used increasingly in prenatal diagnosis. Unfortunately, the clinical implication of many copy number variants found on prenatal CMA is uncertain, complicating genetic counseling. Recognizing that uncertain results will be encountered frequently as more of the genome is assayed prenatally, we set out to understand the experiences and needs of genetic counselors when counseling patients about uncertain prenatal microarray results, their comfort with various aspects of prenatal genetic counseling, and their interest in additional education and training about prenatal microarray testing. We first interviewed 10 genetic counselors about their experiences of providing pre- and post-test genetic counseling about prenatal CMA. Based on the findings from the counselor interviews, we developed items for a survey to assess the prevalence of genetic counselors' attitudes towards, experience and comfort with, and educational needs regarding prenatal CMA. Based on surveys completed by 193 prenatal genetic counselors, we found that when there is an uncertain CMA result, only 59% would be comfortable providing genetic counseling and only 43% would be comfortable helping a patient make a decision about pregnancy termination. Being less comfortable was associated with seeing fewer patients having prenatal CMA testing. Respondents expressed a high degree of interest in additional education about prenatal CMA and counseling about uncertain results. Further genetic counselor education and training aimed at improving counselors' personal comfort with uncertain results and communicating about them with patients is needed.

Ethical and professional challenges of genetic counseling - the case of Austria

Genetic counseling is gaining in importance with the increasing application of genetic testing for diagnosis and clinical treatment. Genetic counseling often raises ethical and professional challenges and prior research has categorized them into 16 domains. The purpose of this study was to analyze the situation in Austria on the basis of these challenges and discuss it in the national and international context. While in some countries there is a special profession for genetic counseling, in Austria it is provided by medical geneticists or other physicians in the context of their specialization. Psychosocial professionals might be consulted or brought in if necessary. Results from 95 survey respondents (including physicians and psychosocial professionals) revealed a greater interest in the topic of genetic counseling by medical specialists other than medical geneticists. The most frequently encountered challenges among physicians were informed consent, organizational constraints, withholding information, and attaining/maintaining proficiency. The psychosocial professionals experienced maintaining proficiency and organizational constraints as the prevalent challenges. Additional findings and practice implications are presented.

Genetic counseling as a tool for type 2 diabetes prevention: a genetic counseling framework for common polygenetic disorders

Advances in genetic epidemiology have increased understanding of common, polygenic preventable diseases such as type 2 diabetes. As genetic risk testing based on this knowledge moves into clinical practice, we propose that genetic counselors will need to expand their roles and adapt traditional counseling techniques for this new patient set. In this paper, we present a genetic counseling intervention developed for a clinical trial [Genetic Counseling/Lifestyle Change for Diabetes Prevention, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01034319] designed to motivate behavioral changes for diabetes prevention. Seventy-two phenotypically high-risk participants received counseling that included their diabetes genetic risk score, general education about diabetes risk factors, and encouragement to participate in a diabetes prevention program. Using two validated genetic counseling scales, participants reported favorable perceived control and satisfaction with the counseling session. Our intervention represents one model for applying traditional genetic counseling principles to risk testing for polygenetic, preventable diseases, such as type 2 diabetes.

Representing and intervening: 'doing' good care in first trimester prenatal knowledge production and decision-making

This article investigates processes of knowledge production and decision-making in the practice of the first trimester prenatal risk assessment (FTPRA) at an ultrasound clinic in Denmark. On the basis of ethnographic material and interviews with professionals facilitating FTPRAs in Denmark, we draw attention to the active engagement of health professionals in this process. Current professional and policy debate over the use of prenatal testing emphasises the need for informed choice making and for services that provide prospective parents with what is referred to as 'non-directive counselling'. Studies focusing on professional practice of prenatal counselling tend to deal mainly with how professionals fail to live up to such ideals in practice. In this article we extend such studies by drawing attention to practices of care in prenatal testing and counselling. In doing so, we identify three modes of 'doing' good care: attuning expectations and knowledge, allowing resistance and providing situated influence in the relationship between the pregnant woman and the professional. Such practices may not be seen as immediately compatible with the non-directive ethos, but they express ways of reducing emotional suffering and supporting a pregnant woman's ability to make meaningful choices on the basis of uncertain knowledge. As such, these practices can be seen as representing another (caring) solution to the problem of paternalism and authoritarian power. In opposition to an ethics aiming at non-interference (non-directiveness) such modes of doing good care express an ethics of being locally accountable for the ways in which programmes of prenatal testing intervene in pregnant women's lives and of taking responsibility for the entities and phenomena that emerge through such knowledge production.

Talking about disability in prenatal genetic counseling: a report of two interactive workshops

Women are commonly offered testing in pregnancy to determine the health of their baby. An important component of informed decision-making about prenatal testing is provision of relevant, accurate, meaningful information concerning the conditions that are being tested for--many of which, such as Down syndrome, are associated with a varying degree of physical and intellectual disability. A range of health professionals, including genetic counselors, may provide information and support throughout the testing process, but available data suggest that discussion of disability is frequently absent or limited. To investigate genetic counselors' perceptions of this situation and identify potential barriers to discussion we facilitated interactive workshops at the 2007 National Society of Genetic Counselors Annual Education Conference (NSGC) and the 2008 European Meeting on Psychosocial Aspects of Genetics (EMPAG). Working groups identified relevant psychosocial issues and impediments to discussion (NSGC) or used a two-part scenario to promote discussion (EMPAG) and reported findings in notes and a closing plenary discussion. Inductive content analysis revealed that participants considered informed decision making to be a major reason for presenting information about disabilities in prenatal genetic counseling and endorsed the value of including information about daily life with Down syndrome and other disabilities. However, they identified three broad types of impediments to such discussion: counseling issues concerning the most appropriate manner to discuss disability under the complex circumstances of prenatal genetic counseling, less than optimal training and experience in addressing these issues, and perceived limitations in the participants' knowledge and understanding of life with disability. Our analysis of the responses from the workshop participants and additional thoughts on these issues have led us to develop recommendations for further research, training and clinical practice.

Non-directive Genetic Counselling – Respect for Autonomy or Unprofessional Practice?

Historically, genetic counselling was developed in the West and in the field of neonatal medicine, and a non-directive approach has been its central ethos since the 1950s to 60s. In today’s changing world, the question of whether non-directive genetic counselling with its emphasis on patient autonomy may in some occasions be perceived as unprofessional practice. Through these 4 case studies in cancer genetic counselling, we seek to highlight the conundrums, dilemmas and various other considerations of patients and their families faced during the genetic counselling process. We also address the pitfalls of a ‘one-size fits all’ approach of non-directive counselling and how we could best practice cancer genetic counselling in the Singapore context, taking into consideration respect for patient autonomy and healthcare professionalism. Key words: Cancer genetics, Hereditary cancer

Awareness, perceptions, and provider recommendation related to genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer risk among at-risk Hispanic women: similarities and variations by sub-ethnicity

This study explored awareness of risk factors for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), awareness, knowledge and concerns about genetic testing, and preference for how to have genetic testing recommended by a care provider among at-risk Hispanic women. Differences in these factors among Mexican, Cuban, and Puerto Rican women were also examined. Women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer from the Tampa Bay Area participated in a qualitative interview (N = 53). Data were analyzed using a combination of open and axial coding with a grounded theory approach. Study participants in all groups reported: being aware that family history was a breast cancer risk factor, limited knowledge of genetic testing, fear of test results, concerns about children's risks, and no physician referral for genetic testing. Noteworthy sub-ethnic differences included preferences for physician recommendation and information about genetic testing. This study provides important preliminary information about areas related to HBOC that require additional education in the Hispanic community as a whole and by sub-ethnicity.

What keeps you up at night? Genetics professionals' distressing experiences in patient care

PURPOSE

To explore specific patient care experiences that genetics professionals associate with distress and the emotions engendered by those experiences.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, and genetic nurses that focused on a single distressing experience.

RESULTS

Fourteen clinical geneticists, 25 genetic counselors, and 14 nurses were interviewed. We categorized the situations that interviewees associated with distressing patient care experiences into seven major types: patient/family decisions (27% of total situations), giving bad news (17%), colleague behavior (15%), end-of-life issues (12%), unintended outcomes (12%), difficult patients (8%), and injustice/inhumanity (8%). Interviewees reported experiencing a variety of negative emotions during these situations, including anger, guilt, helplessness, and inadequacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The distress and resulting emotions experienced by genetic service providers must be acknowledged. Interventions are needed to assist the clinician in becoming self-aware by reflecting on experienced emotions, examining belief systems and values, and understanding the connection between their emotions and behavior. Involvement in mindfulness meditation, reflective writing, peer support groups or additional communication skill-based training could address this need. In addition, clinicians should seek ways to increase personal meaning derived from providing patient care.

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.

Genetic counselors' religiosity & spirituality: are genetic counselors different from the general population?

Although there is evidence that the religious beliefs of genetic counselors (GCs) can induce internal conflict in at least some genetic counseling scenarios, empirical research on the religiosity of GCs is limited. This study compares genetic counselors to a representative sample of the adult U.S. population on multiple religiosity measures. After controlling for several sociodemographic factors the percentage of GCs who report having a religious affiliation is similar to the general U.S., but GCs are less likely to affiliate with conservative Christian religions and are more likely to be Jewish. GCs are significantly less likely than the general U.S. population to: believe in god, attend religious services, pray, and believe in an afterlife even after controlling for relevant sociodemographic factors. Despite the lower levels of religiosity, a majority of GCs do report themselves to be moderately to highly spiritual. We explore potential reasons for religiosity differences as well as possible implications in the context of the GC scope of practice.

What is ideal genetic counselling? A survey of current international guidelines

The objective of this article is to review guidelines that address counselling in the context of genetic testing in order to summarise what aspects of counselling they consider most important, and to examine how they construct the ideal of genetic counselling. Guidelines were collected by examining the websites of different international professional, political, ethical and patient organisations, either previously known or found with the help of the Google search engine, and also using references listed in other studies. The most frequently mentioned topics in the collected 56 guidelines were sought, and this was carried out with the software package Qualitative Solutions and Research for Non-numerical Unstructured Data Indexing Searching and Theorizing. Topics related to genetic counselling that were mentioned in at least 30 of 56 collected documents were considered to be the most important aspects of genetic counselling. The ideal of genetic counselling is expressed in the analysed guidelines as being composed of (1) an appropriately trained professional who understands genetics and its ethical implications well; (2) relevant and objective information; (3) assurance of the counsellee's understanding; (4) psychological support; (5) informed consent; (6) confidentiality of genetic information; (7) considering familial implications; (8) appropriate handling of potential discrimination of testing; and (9) assuring autonomous decision-making by the counsellee. The ideal of genetic counselling is rather consistent in the guidelines, but there are some contradictions between the requirements of objective information-giving and adapting counselling to counsellee's circumstances.

Coming full circle: a reciprocal-engagement model of genetic counseling practice

As genetic health care and genetic testing expand from primarily addressing conditions that are exclusively genetic in nature to common diseases with both genetic and environmental components, the scope of genetic counseling has grown. Identification and utilization of a normative model of practice defined by members of the profession is critical as genetic services become more commonplace in medical care. The purpose of this paper is to describe the results of a consensus conference convened to define a model of genetic counseling practice based on the guidance of educators and leaders in the profession. Twenty-three program directors or their representatives from 20 genetic counseling graduate programs in North America listened to presentations and participated in group discussions aimed at determining the elements of a model of practice, including tenets, goals, strategies, and behaviors for addressing patients' genetic concerns. Their discussion is summarized, training implications and research recommendations are presented, and a model of practice that extends their ideas is proposed.