首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Dealing with treatment and transfer requests: how PGD-professionals discuss ethical challenges arising in everyday practice
Authors:Melisa?Soto-Lafontaine,Wybo?Dondorp  author-information"  >  author-information__contact u-icon-before"  >  mailto:w.dondorp@maastrichtuniversity.nl"   title="  w.dondorp@maastrichtuniversity.nl"   itemprop="  email"   data-track="  click"   data-track-action="  Email author"   data-track-label="  "  >Email author  author-information__orcid u-icon-before icon--orcid u-icon-no-repeat"  >  http://orcid.org/---"   itemprop="  url"   title="  View OrcID profile"   target="  _blank"   rel="  noopener"   data-track="  click"   data-track-action="  OrcID"   data-track-label="  "  >View author&#  s OrcID profile,Veerle?Provoost,Guido?de?Wert
Affiliation:1.Department of Health Ethics & Society, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research School, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology,Maastricht University,Maastricht,The Netherlands;2.Bioethics Institute Ghent,Ghent University,Ghent,Belgium
Abstract:How do professionals working in pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) reflect upon their decision making with regard to ethical challenges arising in everyday practice? Two focus group discussions were held with staff of reproductive genetic clinics: one in Utrecht (The Netherlands) with PGD-professionals from Dutch PGD-centres and one in Prague (Czech Republic) with PGD-professionals working in centres in different European countries. Both meetings consisted of two parts, exploring participants’ views regarding (1) treatment requests for conditions that may not fulfill traditional indications criteria for PGD, and (2) treatment and transfer requests involving welfare-of-the-child considerations. There was general support for the view that people who come for PGD will have their own good reasons to consider the condition they wish to avoid as serious. But whereas PGD-professionals in the international group tended to stress the applicants’ legal right to eventually have the treatment they want (whatever the views of the professional), participants in the Dutch group sketched a picture of shared decision-making, where professionals would go ahead with treatment in cases where they are able to understand the reasonableness of the request in the light of the couple’s reproductive history or family experience. In the international focus group there was little support for guidance stating that welfare-of-the child considerations should be taken into account. This was different in the Dutch focus group, where shared decision-making also had the role of reassuring professionals that applicants had adequately considered possible implications for the welfare of the child.
Keywords:
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号