Embryo and stem cell research in the USA: a political history.

Embryo and stem cell research in the USA is inextricably linked with the abortion debate. Since 1973, when elective abortions became legal, the government has refused to fund therapeutic research for fear it would encourage abortions. Research has continued in an unregulated private sector. Here, the unique US cultural, political and religious factors that have resulted in this situation are discussed.

Serious genetic disorders: can or should they be defined?

The word "serious" appears in laws and policies regarding genetics services but is not defined. Genetics professionals would most likely be consulted if definitions are made. We surveyed all U.S. board-certified genetics services providers and all members of the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG), Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG), and Ibero-American Society of Human Genetics (IASHG), using anonymous, mailed questionnaires. Respondents were asked to list three conditions they considered lethal, three that were serious but not lethal, and three that were not serious. Of 3,317 asked to respond, 1,481 (45%) returned questionnaires. Analysis was limited to responses of the 1,264 (85%) who saw patients. Respondents listed 537 conditions, with extensive overlap between categories; 46% of conditions listed as serious were also listed as not serious and 41% were listed as lethal. Respondents did not want professional societies, laws, or national ethics committees to define serious. They favored individual patients as decision makers, with the help of individual doctors. Their reasons were that genetic disorders vary in expression, individuals perceive disorders differently, professional or legal definitions could be unfair to minority groups, definitions tend to be inflexible when new treatments appear. In the United States, most would not use a definition of serious to limit reproductive services, carrier screening, or neonatal intensive care; outside the United States, more supported limitations. There is not sufficient consensus among experienced genetics professionals to define serious genetic conditions for purposes of law or policy. Responses point to social and economic influences on perceptions of what constitutes a serious genetic disorder.

In focus. Has patient autonomy gone to far? Geneticists' views in 36 nations.

We surveyed genetics professionals, patients, and the public about rights to information, to requested services, and to parenthood, posing difficult cases found in practice. In all, 2906 genetics professionals (63%), 499 primary care physicians (59%), 476 North American genetics patients (67%), 394 French patients (51%), 593 German patients (65%), and 988 members of the American public (99%) returned anonymous questionnaires. Results suggest a trend toward increased respect for patient autonomy since an earlier survey in 1985; in most nations more would perform prenatal diagnosis for a couple with 4 daughters who desire a son. A minority (35% in U.S., 14% elsewhere) would perform PND for a deaf couple who want a deaf child, but most (94% in U.S., 62% elsewhere) would do prenatal paternity testing in the absence of rape or incest. About half (51%) would support a woman with fragile X who wants children. The trend to respect patient autonomy was greatest in the U.S. and was least evident in China and India. In general, responses to these cases illustrate a shift away from population or eugenic concerns to a model of genetics focused on the individual.

Providers' gender and moral reasoning: a proposed agenda for research on providers and patients.

Women constitute 35% of providers in genetics, at the doctoral level. A survey of 682 geneticists in 19 nations showed that gender was the single most important determinant of ethical decision making. Women were less directive and more observant of patient autonomy than men. The future influx of women into medicine calls for research on provider gender and decisions. Research is also needed on women's and men's perceptions of abortion for genetic reasons, on extended families' views, on agreement between partners and on overall effectiveness of genetic counseling, including communication, elements of provider satisfaction, interpretation of risk and uncertainty after counseling.

Privacy and disclosure in medical genetics examined in an ethics of care.

The progress of genetic knowledge magnifies existing ethical problems in medical genetics. Among the most troubling types of problems -- for medicine, patients, and the larger society -- are those of privacy and disclosure. Examples of the range of problems involving privacy and disclosure are: 1) disclosure of false paternity to an unsuspecting husband; 2) disclosure of a patient's genetic make-up to his or her unknowing spouse; 3) disclosure of information, against a patient's wishes, to relatives at genetic risk; 4) disclosure of ambiguous test results; 5) disclosure of adventitious nonmedical information, e.g., fetal sex; and 6) disclosure to institutional third parties, such as employers and insurers....