Abstract
The popular view of non-directive genetic counseling limits the counselor's role to providing information to clients and assisting families in making decisions in a morally neutral fashion. This view of non-directive genetic counseling is shown to be incomplete. A fuller understanding of what it means to respect autonomy shows that merely respecting client choices does not exhaust the duty. Moreover, the genetic counselor/client relationship should also be governed by the counselor's commitment to the principle of beneficience. When non-directive counseling is reexamined in light of both these principles, it becomes clear that there are cases in which counselors should attempt to persuade clients to reconsider their decisions. Such attempts are consistent with non-directive counseling because, while respecting the clients' decision-making authority, they insure that clients act with full knowledge of the moral consequences of their decisions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fletcher JC, Berg K, Tranøy KE. Ethical aspects of medical genetics. Clin Genet 1983;27:199–205.
Hsia YE. The genetic counselor as information giver. In: Capron AM, Lappe M, Murray RF, Powledge TM, Twiss SB, Bergsma D, eds. Genetic Counseling: Facts, Values and Norms. New York: Alan R Liss Inc., 1979:169–86.
Elias S, Annas GJ. Reproductive Genetics and the Law. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers Inc., 1987.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983.
Pines M. In the shadow of Huntington's. Science 84 1984;5:32–9.
Gusella JF, Wexler NS, Conneally PM, et al. Polymorphic DNA marker genetically linked to Huntington's disease. Nature 1983;306:234–8.
Gilliam TC, Tanzi RE, Haines JL, et al. Localization of the Huntington's disease gene to a small segment of chromosome 4 flanked by D4S10 and the telomore. Cell 1987;50:565–71.
Purdy LM. Genetic diseases: can having children be immoral? In: Mappes TA, Zembaty JS, eds. Biomedical Ethics. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1981:468–75.
Ratzan R. Unsolicited medical opinion. J. Med Philos 1985;10:146–62.
Mosley R. Excuse me, but you have a melanoma on your neck! Unsolicited medical opinions. J. Med Philos 1985;10:163–70.
Mill JS. On Liberty. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1978.
Thomson JJ. A defense of abortion. In: Cohen M, Nagel T, Scanlon T, eds. The Rights and Wrongs of Abortion. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974:3–22.
McCullough LB, Wear S. Respect for autonomy and medical paternalism reconsidered. Theor Med 1985;6:295–308.
Ost D. The right not to know. J. Med Philos 1984;9:301–12.
Twiss SB. The genetic counselor as moral advisor. In: Capron AB, Lappe M, Murray RF, Powledge TM, Twiss SB, Bergsma D, eds. Genetic Counseling: Facts, Values and Norms. New York: Alan R Liss Inc., 1979;15:201–22.
Shaw MW. Testing for the Huntington gene: a right to know, a right not to know, or a duty to know. Am J Med Genet 1987;26:243–6.
Kessler S. The dilemma of suicide and Huntington disease. Am J Med Genet 1987;26:315–7.
Strasser M. Mill and the right to remain uninformed. J Med Philos 1986;11:265–78.
Smith DH, Pettegrew LS. Mutual persuasion as a model for doctor-patient communication. Theor Med 1986;7:127–46.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yarborough, M., Scott, J.A. & Dixon, L.K. The role of beneficence in clinical genetics: Non-directive counseling reconsidered. Theor Med Bioeth 10, 139–149 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00539879
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00539879