TY - JOUR
T1 - Addressing the Ethical Challenges in Genetic Testing and Sequencing of Children
AU - Clayton, Ellen Wright
AU - McCullough, Laurence B.
AU - Biesecker, Leslie G.
AU - Joffe, Steven
AU - Ross, Lainie Friedman
AU - Wolf, Susan M.
PY - 2014/3
Y1 - 2014/3
N2 - American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) recently provided two recommendations about predictive genetic testing of children. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium's Pediatrics Working Group compared these recommendations, focusing on operational and ethical issues specific to decision making for children. Content analysis of the statements addresses two issues: (1) how these recommendations characterize and analyze locus of decision making, as well as the risks and benefits of testing, and (2) whether the guidelines conflict or come to different but compatible conclusions because they consider different testing scenarios. These statements differ in ethically significant ways. AAP/ACMG analyzes risks and benefits using best interests of the child and recommends that, absent ameliorative interventions available during childhood, clinicians should generally decline to order testing. Parents authorize focused tests. ACMG analyzes risks and benefits using the interests of the child and other family members and recommends that sequencing results be examined for additional variants that can lead to ameliorative interventions, regardless of age, which laboratories should report to clinicians who should contextualize the results. Parents must accept additional analysis. The ethical arguments in these statements appear to be in tension with each other.
AB - American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) recently provided two recommendations about predictive genetic testing of children. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium's Pediatrics Working Group compared these recommendations, focusing on operational and ethical issues specific to decision making for children. Content analysis of the statements addresses two issues: (1) how these recommendations characterize and analyze locus of decision making, as well as the risks and benefits of testing, and (2) whether the guidelines conflict or come to different but compatible conclusions because they consider different testing scenarios. These statements differ in ethically significant ways. AAP/ACMG analyzes risks and benefits using best interests of the child and recommends that, absent ameliorative interventions available during childhood, clinicians should generally decline to order testing. Parents authorize focused tests. ACMG analyzes risks and benefits using the interests of the child and other family members and recommends that sequencing results be examined for additional variants that can lead to ameliorative interventions, regardless of age, which laboratories should report to clinicians who should contextualize the results. Parents must accept additional analysis. The ethical arguments in these statements appear to be in tension with each other.
KW - benefits
KW - best interests of the child
KW - ethics
KW - exome sequencing
KW - genome sequencing
KW - interests of child and family
KW - pediatrics
KW - risks
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897723575&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897723575&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/15265161.2013.879945
DO - 10.1080/15265161.2013.879945
M3 - Article
C2 - 24592828
AN - SCOPUS:84897723575
SN - 1526-5161
VL - 14
SP - 3
EP - 9
JO - American Journal of Bioethics
JF - American Journal of Bioethics
IS - 3
ER -