Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 367–373 | Cite as

Genetic Counseling and the Ethical Issues Around Direct to Consumer Genetic Testing

Professional Issues

Abstract

Over the last several years, direct to consumer (DTC) genetic testing has received increasing attention in the public, healthcare and academic realms. DTC genetic testing companies face considerable criticism and scepticism, particularly from the medical and genetic counseling community. This raises the question of what specific aspects of DTC genetic testing provoke concerns, and conversely, promises, for genetic counselors. This paper addresses this question by exploring DTC genetic testing through an ethical lens. By considering the fundamental ethical approaches influencing genetic counseling (the ethic of care and principle-based ethics) we highlight the specific ethical concerns raised by DTC genetic testing companies. Ultimately, when considering the ethics of DTC testing in a genetic counseling context, we should think of it as a balancing act. We need careful and detailed consideration of the risks and troubling aspects of such testing, as well as the potentially beneficial direct and indirect impacts of the increased availability of DTC genetic testing. As a result it is essential that genetic counselors stay informed and involved in the ongoing debate about DTC genetic testing and DTC companies. Doing so will ensure that the ethical theories and principles fundamental to the profession of genetic counseling are promoted not just in traditional counseling sessions, but also on a broader level. Ultimately this will help ensure that the public enjoys the benefits of an increasingly genetic-based healthcare system.

Keywords

Direct to consumer genetic testing Ethics Genetic Counseling Values 

References

  1. ACMG (2004). ACMG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Genetics in Medicine, 6(1), 60.Google Scholar
  2. Angrist, M. (2009). We are the genes we’ve been waiting for: rational responses to the gathering storm of personal genomics. The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(6), 30–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, K., Micco, E., Carney, A., Stopfer, J., & Putt, M. (2005). Racial differences in the use of BRCA1/2 testing among women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(14), 1729–1736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2009). Principles of biomedical ethics. USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bloss, C., Ornowski, L., Silver, E., Cargill, M., Vanier, V., Schork, N., et al. (2010). Consumer perceptions of direct to consumer personalized genomic risk assessments. Genetics in Medicine, 12(9), 556–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloss, C., Schork, N., & Topol, E. (2011). Effect of direct to consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. The New England Journal of Medicine, 364(6), 524–534.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bloss, C. S., Topol, E. J., & Schork, N. J. (2011). Association of direct-to-consumer genome-wide disease risk estimates and self-reported disease. Genetic Epidemiology. doi:10.1002/gepi.20664.
  8. Brice, P. (2010). Current DTC genetic testing market smaller than expected. http://www.phgfoundation.org/news/5658/. Accessed May 30 2011.
  9. Burke, W., & Psaty, B. (2007). Personalized medicine in the era of genomics. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 298(14), 1682–1684.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burke, S., Martyn, M., Stone, A., Bennett, C., Thomas, H., & Farndon, P. (2009). Developing a curriculum statement based on clinical practice: genetics in primary care. British Journal of General Practice, 59(559), 99–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caulfield, T. (2009). Direct to consumer genetics and health policy: a worst-case scenario? The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(6 & 7), 48–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daniels, N. (2001). Justice, health, and healthcare. American Journal of Bioethics, 1(2), 2–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Geransar, R., & Einsiedel, E. (2008). Evaluating online direct to consumer marketing of genetic tests: informed choices or buyers beware? Genetic testing, 12(1), 13–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gillon, R. (1986). Philosophical Medical Ethics. Wiley and Son.Google Scholar
  15. Giovanni, M. A., Fickie, M. R., Lehmann, L. S., Green, R. C., Meckley, L. M., Veenstra, D., et al. (2010). Health-care referrals from direct to consumer genetic testing. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers, 14(6), 817–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gollust, S. E., Hull, S. C., & Wilfond, B. S. (2002). Limitations of direct to consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 288(14), 1762–1767.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Green, R. C., Roberts, J. S., Cupples, L. A., Relkin, N. R., Whitehouse, P. J., Brown, T., et al. (2009). Disclosure of APOE genotype for risk of Alzheimer’s disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 361(3), 245–254.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guttmacher, A. E., Porteous, M. E., & McInerney, J. D. (2007). Educating health-care professionals about genetics and genomics. Nature Reviews Genetics, 8(2), 151–157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hall, M., & Olopade, O. I. (2005). Confronting genetic testing disparities. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(14), 1783–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Headings, V. (1997). Revisiting foundations of autonomy and beneficence in genetic counseling. Genetic Counseling, 8(4), 291–294.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Heshka, J. T., Palleschi, C., Howley, H., Wilson, B., & Wells, P. S. (2008). A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing. Genetics in Medicine, 10(1), 19–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hock, K. T., Christensen, K. D., Yashar, B. M., Roberts, J. S., Gollust, S. E., & Uhlmann, W. R. (2011). Direct to consumer genetic testing: an assessment of genetic counselors’ knowledge and beliefs. Genetics in Medicine, 13(4), 325–332.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Howard, H., & Borry, P. (2009). Personal genome testing: do you know what you are buying? The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(6), 11–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hsu, A., Mountain, J., Wojcicki, A., & Avey, L. (2009). A pragmatic consideration of ethical issues relating to personal genomics. The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(6), 1–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hudson, K., Javitt, G., Burke, W., & Byers, P. (2007). ASHG statement on direct to consumer genetic testing in the United States. American Journal of Human Genetics, 81(3), 635–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hunter, A. G. W., Sharpe, N., Mullen, M., & Meschino, W. S. (2001). Ethical, legal, and practical concerns about recontacting patients to inform them of new information: the case in medical genetics. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 103(4), 265–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Janssens, A. C., Gwinn, M., Bradley, L. A., Oostra, B. A., van Duijn, C. M., & Khoury, M. J. (2008). A critical appraisal of the scientific basis of commercial genomic profiles used to assess health risks and personalize health interventions. American Journal Human Genetics, 82(3), 593–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jonsen, A. R. (1986). Casuistry and clinical ethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 7(1), 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jordens, C., Kerridge, I., & Samuel, G. (2009). Direct to consumer personal genome testing: the problem is not ignorance - it is market failure. The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(6), 13–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaphingst, K. A., McBride, C. M., Wade, C., Alford, S. H., Brody, L. C., & Baxevanis, A. D. (2010). Consumers’ use of web-based information and their decisions about multiplex genetic susceptibility testing. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 12(3), e41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Karns, L., Roche, M., & Yashar, B. (2005). An ethics casebook for genetic counselors, 2nd Edition: Ethical discourse for the practice of genetic counseling. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Marchant, G., Milligan, R., & Wilhelmi, B. (2006). Legal pressures and incentives for personalized medicine. Personalized Medicine, 3(4), 391–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McBride, C. M., Alford, S. H., Reid, R. J., Larson, E. B., Baxevanis, A. D., & Brody, L. C. (2009). Characteristics of users of online personalized genomic risk assessments: implications for physician-patient interactions. Genetics in Medicine, 11(8), 582–587.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McGuire, A., & Burke, W. (2008). An unwelcome side effect of direct to consumer personal genome testing: raiding the medical commons. Journal of the American Medical Association, 300(22), 2669–2671.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McGuire, A., Diaz, C., Hilsenbeck, S., & Wang, T. (2009). Social networkers’ attitudes toward direct to consumer personal genome testing. The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(6), 3–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller, R. (1996). Casuistry and modern ethics: A poetics of practical reasoning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. NSGC (2006). Code of Ethics. http://www.nsgc.org/Advocacy/NSGCCodeofEthics/tabid/155/Default.aspx. Accessed May 20, 2011.
  38. Offit, K. (2008). Genomic profiles for disease risk: predictive or premature? JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 299(11), 1353–1355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Offit, K., Groeger, E., Turner, S., Wadsworth, E. A., & Weiser, M. A. (2004). The“ duty to warn” a patient’s family members about hereditary disease risks. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 292(12), 14691473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Salkin, A. (2008). When in Doubt, Spit It Out. (Sep 14th). New York Times.Google Scholar
  41. Schmerler, S. (1999). Ethical and legal issues. In D. Baker, J. Schuette, & W. Uhlmann (Eds.), A guide to genetic counseling. New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  42. Sirovich, B., Woloshin, S., & Schwartz, L. (2011). Too little? Too much? Primary care physicians’ views on us health care a brief report. Archives of Internal Medicine, 171(17), 1582–1585.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wade, C. H., & Wilfond, B. S. (2006). Ethical and clinical practice considerations for genetic counselors related to direct to consumer marketing of genetic tests. Journal of Medical Genetics, 142(4), 284–292.Google Scholar
  44. Wasson, K., Cook, E., & Helzlsouer, K. (2006). Direct to consumer online genetic testing and the four principles: an analysis of the ethical issues. Ethics and Medicine, 22(2), 83–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Weil, J. (2000). Psychosocial genetic counseling. USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Weil, J. (2003). Psychosocial genetic counseling in the post-nondirective era: a point of view. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 12(3), 199–211.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Williams, M. (2007). Insurance coverage for pharmacogenomic testing in the USA. Personalized Medicine, 4(4), 479–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Applied EthicsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations