Reconciling ethical and economic conceptions of value in health policy using the capabilities approach: A qualitative investigation of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing.

When evaluating new morally complex health technologies, policy decision-makers consider a broad range of different evaluations, which may include the technology's clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and social or ethical implications. This type of holistic assessment is challenging, because each of these evaluations may be grounded in different and potentially contradictory assumptions about the technology's value. One such technology where evaluations conflict is Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT). Cost-effectiveness evaluations of NIPT often assess NIPT's ability to deliver on goals (i.e preventing the birth of children with disabilities) that social and ethical analyses suggest it should not have. Thus, cost effectiveness analyses frequently contradict social and ethical assessments of NIPT's value. We use the case of NIPT to explore how economic evaluations using a capabilities approach may be able to capture a broader, more ethical view of the value of NIPT. The capabilities approach is an evaluative framework which bases wellbeing assessments on a person's abilities, rather than their expressed preferences. It is linked to extra-welfarist approaches in health economic assessment. Beginning with Nussbaum's capability framework, we conducted a directed qualitative content analysis of interview data collected in 2014 from 27 Canadian women with personal experience of NIPT. We found that eight of Nussbaum's ten capabilities related to options, states, or choices that women valued in the context of NIPT, and identified one new capability. Our findings suggest that women value NIPT for its ability to provide more and different choices in the prenatal care pathway, and that a capabilities approach can indeed capture the value of NIPT in a way that goes beyond measuring health outcomes of ambiguous social and ethical value. More broadly, the capabilities approach may serve to resolve contradictions between ethical and economic evaluations of health technologies, and contribute to extra-welfarist approaches in the assessment of morally complex health technologies.

Obstetric professionals' perceptions of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome: clinical usefulness compared with existing tests and ethical implications.

BACKGROUND: While non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal aneuploidy is commercially available in many countries, little is known about how obstetric professionals in non-Western populations perceive the clinical usefulness of NIPT in comparison with existing first-trimester combined screening (FTS) for Down syndrome (DS) or invasive prenatal diagnosis (IPD), or perceptions of their ethical concerns arising from the use of NIPT. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among 327 obstetric professionals (237 midwives, 90 obstetricians) in Hong Kong. RESULTS: Compared to FTS, NIPT was believed to: provide more psychological benefits and enable earlier consideration of termination of pregnancy. Compared to IPD, NIPT was believed to: provide less psychological stress for high-risk women and more psychological assurance for low-risk women, and offer an advantage to detect chromosomal abnormalities earlier. Significant differences in perceived clinical usefulness were found by profession and healthcare sector: (1) obstetricians reported more certain views towards the usefulness of NIPT than midwives and (2) professionals in the public sector perceived less usefulness of NIPT than the private sector. Beliefs about earlier detection of DS using NIPT were associated with ethical concerns about increasing abortion. Participants believing that NIPT provided psychological assurance among low-risk women were less likely to be concerned about ethical issues relating to informed decision-making and pre-test consultation for NIPT. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest the need for political debate initially on how to ensure pregnant women accessing public services are informed about commercially available more advanced technology, but also on the potential implementation of NIPT within public services to improve access and equity to DS screening services.

Prenatal screening, reproductive choice, and public health.

One widely held view of prenatal screening (PNS) is that its foremost aim is, or should be, to enable reproductive choice; this is the Pure Choice view. The article critiques this position by comparing it with an alternative: Public Health Pluralism. It is argued that there are good reasons to prefer the latter, including the following. (1) Public Health Pluralism does not, as is often supposed, render PNS more vulnerable to eugenics-objections. (2) The Pure Choice view, if followed through to its logical conclusions, may have unpalatable implications, such as extending choice well beyond health screening. (3) Any sensible version of Public Health Pluralism will be capable of taking on board the moral seriousness of abortion and will advocate, where practicable, alternative means of reducing the prevalence of disease and disability. (4) Public Health Pluralism is at least as well-equipped as the Pure Choice model to deal with autonomy and consent issues.

A new ethical landscape of prenatal testing: individualizing choice to serve autonomy and promote public health: a radical proposal.

A new landscape of prenatal testing (PNT) is presently developing, including new techniques for risk-reducing, non-invasive sampling of foetal DNA and drastically enhanced possibilities of what may be rapidly and precisely analysed, surrounded by a growing commercial genetic testing industry and a general trend of individualization in healthcare policies. This article applies a set of established ethical notions from past debates on PNT for analysing PNT screening-programmes in this new situation. While some basic challenges of PNT stay untouched, the new development supports a radical individualization of how PNT screening is organized. This reformation is, at the same time, difficult to reconcile with responsible spending of resources in a publicly funded healthcare context. Thus, while the ethical imperative of individualization holds and applies to PNT, the new landscape of PNT provides reasons to start rolling back the type of mass-screening programmes currently established in many countries. Instead, more limited offers are suggested, based on considerations of severity of conditions and optimized to simultaneously serve reproductive autonomy and public health within an acceptable frame of priorities. The new landscape of PNT furthermore underscores the ethical importance of supporting and including people with disabilities. For the very same reason, no ban on what may be analysed using PNT in the new landscape should be applied, although private offers must, of course, conform to strict requirements of respecting reproductive autonomy and what that means in terms of counselling.

Prenatal screening: an ethical agenda for the near future.

Prenatal screening for foetal abnormalities such as Down's syndrome differs from other forms of population screening in that the usual aim of achieving health gains through treatment or prevention does not seem to apply. This type of screening leads to no other options but the choice between continuing or terminating the pregnancy and can only be morally justified if its aim is to provide meaningful options for reproductive choice to pregnant women and their partners. However, this aim should not be understood as maximizing reproductive choice per se. Only if understood as allowing prospective parents to avoid suffering related to living with (a child with) serious disorders and handicaps can prenatal screening be a publicly or collectively funded programme. The alternative of moving prenatal testing outside the healthcare system into the private sector is problematic, as it makes these tests accessible only to those who can afford to pay for it. New developments in prenatal screening will have to be assessed in terms of whether and to what extent they either contribute to or undermine the stated aim of providing meaningful options for reproductive choice. In the light of this criterion, this article discusses the introduction of the new non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT), the tendency to widen the scope of follow-up testing, as well as the possible future scenarios of genome-wide screening and 'prenatal personalised medicine'. The article ends with recommendations for further debate, research and analysis.

[Words before actions- the significance of counselling in the Praena-Test era]. / Worte vor Taten - der Stellenwert der Beratung in der Ära des Praena-Tests.

Due to new offers in prenatal diagnostics pregnant women are forced to make choices. In Switzerland physicians are obliged to inform previous to prenatal tests and to obtain informed consent. Considering the complexity of this information and the consequences of a positive result, counselling is challenging, especially in an intercultural context. A questionnaire-based study compared information processing, test interpretation and emotional response of pregnant women from Switzerland and adjacent countries with Turkish women. Knowledge of the latter was significantly lower and they found counselling more unsettling, but their acceptance of prenatal tests was significantly higher. An empathetic approach and the right words are decisive, and counselling will even gain importance when considering the increase in options patients are confronted with.

Les nouvelles offres dans le diagnostic prénatal contraignent les femmes enceintes à faire des choix. En Suisse, les médecins ont le devoir d'informer au sujet des tests prénataux et en obtenir le consentement. Compte tenu de la complexité, ce conseil est exigeant, avant tout dans un contexte interculturel. Une étude basée sur des questionnaires a comparé les connaissances et les réactions émotionnelles des femmes enceintes de Suisse avec des femmes venant de la Turquie. Cela a montré que les connaissances de ces dernières étaient moindres et qu'elles se sentaient plus insécurisées tout en montrant une acceptation significativement plus élevée relativement au diagnostic prénatal. Une attitude empathique et des mots bien choisis sont décisifs et leur importance va encore prendre de l'ampleur avec l'augmentation des options à disposition des patientes.

'Doctor, what would you do in my position?' Health professionals and the decision-making process in pregnancy monitoring.

OBJECTIVE: Routine prenatal screening for Down syndrome challenges professional non-directiveness and patient autonomy in daily clinical practices. This paper aims to describe how professionals negotiate their role when a pregnant woman asks them to become involved in the decision-making process implied by screening. METHODS: Forty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with gynaecologists-obstetricians (n=26) and midwives (n=15) in a large Swiss city. RESULTS: Three professional profiles were constructed along a continuum that defines the relative distance or proximity towards patients' demands for professional involvement in the decision-making process. The first profile insists on enforcing patient responsibility, wherein the healthcare provider avoids any form of professional participation. A second profile defends the idea of a shared decision making between patients and professionals. The third highlights the intervening factors that justify professionals' involvement in decisions. CONCLUSIONS: These results illustrate various applications of the principle of autonomy and highlight the complexity of the doctor-patient relationship amidst medical decisions today.

[ABORTION AND CHARTER FOR THE EMBRYO BETWEEN THE ANCIENT WORLD AND THE THIRD MILLENNIUM]. / DARE VOCE AI NON-NATI: ABORTO E STATUTO GIURIDICO DELL'EMBRIONE TRA TRADIZIONE IPPOCRATICA E DIRITTO CONTEMPORANEO.

In 2012 the Italian Court of Cassation recognized a young woman the right not to be born and a compensation for her Down's syndrome. Before her birth, her parents asked their gynaecologist for abortion in case he had found any patology affecting the baby. The clinical tests didn't reveal the syndrome, so, after the baby's birth, the doctor was sued for damages. A similar case had occurred in France, where the High Court affirmed that constitution is based on the right to live, not to die. A debate was opened, in which the hippocratic oath has been used to support the pro vita position. This article focuses on whether, when and why the hippocratic tradition allows abortion; when and by whom the embryo was considered to be a human being; if, according to the few sources we have, a charter for the embryo existed in ancient times.

The right to ignore genetic status of late onset genetic disease in the genomic era; Prenatal testing for Huntington disease as a paradigm.

During the last decade, the field of human genome research has gone through a phase of rapid discovery that has provided scientists and physicians with a wide variety of research tools that are applicable to important medical issues. We describe a true case of familial Huntington disease (HD) in which we modified personal details to protect patient's privacy, where the proband at risk preferred not to know his disease status but wanted to know the status in his unborn child. Once we found the father to be negative, the case raised an important ethical question regarding the management of this as well as future pregnancies. This article discusses the arguments for and against the right not to know of one's carrier status, as well as professional obligations in the context of withholding unwanted information that may have direct implications not only for the patient himself but also for other family members. HD has served as a model for many other adult onset genetic diseases in terms of carrier testing guidelines. Hence, we feel it is time to revisit the issue of prenatal testing for HD and consider updating the current recommendations regarding the patient's right to "genetic ignorance", or the right not to know genetic information.

Risk detection in individual health care: any limits?

BACKGROUND: biomedical science is producing an avalanche of data about risk factors, often with a small predictive value, associated with a broad diversity of diseases. Prevention and screening are increasingly moving from public health into the clinic. Therefore, the question of which risk factors to investigate and disclose in the individual patient, becomes ethically increasingly urgent. In line with Wilson and Jungner's public health-related 10 principles for screening, it seems crucial to distinguish important from unimportant health risks. AIM: to explore the ways in which clinicians distinguish important from unimportant health risks. METHODS: we interviewed 36 respondents (gastroenterologists and gynaecologists/obstetrics) in 5 focus group interviews and 15 open in-depth interviews on their interpretation of what makes a health risk important. RESULTS: physicians primarily interpreted importance as the severity of the possible harm, less often its probability. Possibilities of prevention or reassurance strongly influenced their judgment on importance. DISCUSSION: it is not likely that interpreting 'important' as 'severe' will help in differentiating meaningful from meaningless risk knowledge. A more fundamental change in our ways of dealing with risk may be called for. We discuss existing literature on resilience as an alternative way to deal with risk. Balancing prevention and risk reduction with resilience could be a fruitful direction.

[Prenatal diagnostics and information to parents]. / Diagnósticos prenatales: información a los padres.

New screening and prenatal diagnostic techniques, require the Medicine professionals have a clear purpose for its realization, since the intention determined the act is determined in accordance with the values of the Medicine or becoming an event eugenics act by means of "therapeutic abortion". The Family Physician information about these techniques to pregnant women must be based on the status of science, facilitating the risk of loss fetal and false data positive informing of therapeutic possibilities and facilitating respect for the pregnant woman's decision of non-fulfillment of the screening. The information update according to the state of science, should be provided in writing and the informed consent of the patient should be obtained by all professionals involved in testing, with respect shows for the autonomy of the patient.

Thalassemia: the continued challenge.

This overview describes the history of transfusion therapy and consequent iron overload in thalassemia. It emphasizes the importance of measurement of hepatic iron and reviews the history of chelation therapy. It briefly describes the discoveries of the genetic basis of thalassemia and the application of that knowledge in prenatal diagnosis. The review goes on to emphasize pharmaceutical efforts to induce fetal hemoglobin synthesis in thalassemic red cells and ends with a discussion of oral iron chelators, stem cell transplant, and the status of gene therapy.

Ethical issues and policy analysis for genetic testing: Huntington's disease as a paradigm for diseases with a late onset.

This paper discusses the main ethical issues that arise when testing for genetic diseases with a late adult onset, such as Huntington's disease, take place. It is imperative to study genetic testing for HD and similar diseases because of the potential to influence future medical advances and the growing number of individuals who are considered pre-symptomatic. The main ethical issues are consent and privacy, prenatal testing and its implications, in addition to insurance discrimination. These issues are viewed from the perspective of genetic counselors, patients, the families of patients, and insurance companies. Policies put forth by the United States National Society of Genetic Counselors ("NSGC"), the Task Force on Genetic Testing, and the President's Council for Bioethics are also analyzed. Finally, new recommendations are proposed in order to ameliorate the ethical dilemmas encountered in genetic testing. These recommendations are largely based on existing policies and therefore involve amending current policies rather than revamping them.

Ethical decision-making in prenatal diagnosis and termination of pregnancy: a qualitative survey among physicians and midwives.

OBJECTIVES: This study was aimed at exploring the conflicts and ethical problems experienced by professionals involved in prenatal diagnosis and termination of pregnancy (TOP) in order to improve the understanding of decision-making processes and medical practices in the field of prenatal diagnosis. METHODS: Qualitative study with in-depth tape-recorded interviews conducted in three tertiary care maternity units in France, between May 1999 and March 2000. All full-time obstetricians and half of the full-time midwives were contacted. Seventeen obstetricians and 30 midwives participated (three refusals, five missing). Interviews were transcribed and analysed successively by two different researchers. RESULTS: All respondents stated that prenatal diagnosis and TOP raised important ethical dilemmas, the most frequent being request for abortion in case of minor anomalies. They pointed out the inability of our society to appropriately care for disabled children and the risk of eugenic pressures. The decisions and practices in prenatal diagnosis should be debated throughout society. All respondents reported that their unit did not have protocols for deciding when a TOP was justifiable. The transmission of information to the women appeared to be a problematic area. Moral conflicts and emotional distress were frequently expressed, especially by midwives who mentioned the need for more discussions and support groups in their department. CONCLUSION: Health professionals involved in prenatal diagnosis face complex ethical dilemmas which raise important personal conflicts. A need for more resources for counselling women and for open debate about the consequences of the current practices clearly emerged.