Ethical issues in the use of genetic information

The Key Features of a Genetic Nondiscrimination Policy: A Delphi Consensus Statement

Importance

Governments worldwide have become increasingly cognizant of the spread of genetic discrimination (negative treatment or harm on the basis of actual or presumed genetic characteristics). Despite efforts by a number of governments to establish regulations addressing this phenomenon, public concern about genetic discrimination persists.

Objective

To identify key elements of an optimal genetic nondiscrimination policy and inform policymakers as they seek to allay genetic nondiscrimination and related public anxieties.

Evidence Review

Sixty multidisciplinary experts from 20 jurisdictions worldwide were consulted to understand their views on effective genetic nondiscrimination policies. Following standard requirements of the Delphi method, 3 rounds of surveys over the course of 1.5 years were conducted. Round 1 focused on assessing participants' understanding of the intricacies of existing genetic nondiscrimination policies, while rounds 2 and 3 invited participants to reflect on specific means of implementing a more effective regime. A total of 60 respondents participated in the first round, 53 participated in round 2, and 43 participated in round 3.

Findings

While responses varied across disciplines, there was consensus that binding regulations that reach across various sectors are most useful in preventing genetic discrimination. Overall, experts agreed that human rights-based approaches are well suited to preventing genetic discrimination. Experts also agreed that explicit prohibition of genetic discrimination within nondiscrimination policies can highlight the importance of genetic nondiscrimination as a fundamental right and ensure robust protection at a national level. While most participants believed the international harmonization of genetic nondiscrimination laws would facilitate data sharing worldwide, they also recognized that regulations must reflect the sociocultural differences that exist among regions.

Conclusions and Relevance

As the reach of genetic discrimination continues to evolve alongside developments in genomics, strategic policy responses that are harmonious at the international and state levels will be critical to address this phenomenon. In seeking to establish comprehensive frameworks, policymakers will need to be mindful of regional and local circumstances that influence the need for and efficacy of unique genetic nondiscrimination approaches across diverse contexts.

Shared decision making in mental health: prospects for personalized medicine

This paper describes the shared decision-making model, reviews its current status in the mental health field, and discusses its potential impact on personalized medicine. Shared decision making denotes a structured process that encourages full participation by patient and provider. Current research shows that shared decision making can improve the participation of mental health patients and the quality of decisions in terms of knowledge and values. The impact of shared decision making on adherence, illness self-management, and health outcomes remains to be studied. Implementing shared decision making broadly will require re-engineering the flow of clinical care in routine practice settings and much greater use of information technology Similar changes will be needed to combine genomic and other biological data with patients' values and preferences and with clinicians' expertise. The future of personalized medicine is dearly linked with our ability to create the infrastructure and cultural receptivity to these changes.

Depression under stress: ethical issues in genetic testing

Genetic testing for risk of depression requires a reconsideration of ethical issues in genetics and how they manifest in psychiatric practice. A precautionary approach is advocated in that there should be limits on the use of the 5-HTT genetic test until its clinical utility and broader social impact are better understood.

Substance use disorder genetic research: investigators and participants grapple with the ethical issues

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative research examined the ethical concerns regarding the psychosocial issues, research design and implementation, and application of psychiatric genetic research on substance use disorders (SUD) from multiple perspectives.

METHODS

A literature review of the bioethics literature related to psychiatric genetics and focus groups explored the ethical implications of SUD genetic research. Twenty-six National Institute on Drug Abuse funded principal investigators in the field of psychiatric genetic research, nine adolescent patients in residential SUD treatment, and 10 relatives of patients participated in focus groups (held separately). The focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and the content was analyzed. The themes that emerged from the literature and the focus group transcripts were organized by using NVIVO7, a software package designed to manage, analyze, and compare narrative data.

RESULTS

Investigators and the literature expressed similar concerns regarding the ethical concerns associated with psychiatric genetic research including violation of privacy, misunderstanding about psychiatric genetics, stigmatization, commercialization, discrimination, eugenics, consequences of research on illegal behavior, unforeseen consequences, altered notion of individual responsibility, and others. Patients and their relatives showed little familiarity with the ethical issues as identified by professionals and little concern regarding most of the potential risks. The exception was apprehension associated with potential criminal justice uses of stored genetic information, in particular enforced therapy and stigmatization, which elicited some concern from all perspectives.

CONCLUSION

The challenge for further research is to identify risks and benefits of SUD research that are germane in a behaviorally disinhibited population and devise effective tools to communicate information to participants through an improved informed consent process.

Psychiatrists' attitudes regarding genetic testing and patient safeguards: a preliminary study

AIMS

A probability sample of U.S. psychiatrists (n = 93) was invited to complete a mail survey regarding the likely impact of genetic testing on psychiatry; the clinical utility of pharmacogenetic, diagnostic, and susceptibility genetic testing; and 14 proposed ethical and legal safeguards for clinical genetic testing.

RESULTS

Forty-five psychiatrists participated in the survey (response rate = 48%). The majority (80% and 60%, respectively) believed that genetic testing would benefit many psychiatric patients and would dramatically change the way psychiatry is practiced. Many psychiatrists (73-85%) also stated that pharmacogenetic, diagnostic, and susceptibility tests for common psychiatric disorders would be somewhat useful or extremely useful in the clinical setting. Nearly all (98-100%) believed that psychiatrists should obtain informed consent before genetic testing, should keep test results confidential, should provide pre- and posttest counseling, and should demonstrate competence in interpreting test results. Nearly all (96-100%) supported laws and regulations to prevent discrimination based on genetic test results and to protect consumers from misleading advertisements for testing. Ninety-one percent endorsed restrictions on the sale of genetic tests directly to consumers.

CONCLUSIONS

This probability sample of U.S. psychiatrists expressed a strongly positive view of genetic testing in psychiatry, while voicing nearly unanimous support for seven ethical and legal safeguards.