Reproductive decision making: interviews with mothers of children with undiagnosed developmental delay
Reproductive decision making is complex and personal. Having a child with undiagnosed developmental delay can further complicate these decisions, as recurrence risks are unknown. This qualitative study is an exploration of the experiences of parents who have a child with an undiagnosed developmental disorder, focusing on their reproductive decisions. The aims of the research were to explore the reproductive decision making process and examine the factors that influence these decisions. Data were collected from in-depth semi-structured interviews with five mothers of children without a diagnosis. Transcripts were analysed using an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Analysis identified five factors that were considered by participants when contemplating reproductive decisions: future uncertainty, perceptions of risk, the potential impact a child would have on their current children, expectations of a family and the desire for another child. Being aware of the factors that influence reproductive decisions for these mothers and being sensitive to them can enable genetic counsellors to carry out their role more effectively, as they are aware of the factors that need to be discussed and explored before a decision is made.
KeywordsDevelopmental delay Reproductive decisions Diagnosis Undiagnosed Genetic counselling
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Emily Pond and Rebecca Dimond declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5).
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Decruyenaere M, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Philippe K, Demyttenaere K, Dom R, Vandenberghe W, Fryns JP (2007) The complexity of reproductive decision-making in asymptomatic carriers of the Huntington mutation. Eur J Hum Genet 15(4):453–462. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201774 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Downing C (2002). Reproductive decision-making in families at risk for Huntington’s disease: perceptions of responsibility. An unpublished dissertation submitted to the University of Cambridge for the Degree of Doctor of PhilosophyGoogle Scholar
- Lee SM, Nam HW, Kim EN, Shin DW, Moon HJ, Jeong JY, Kim SA, Kim BJ, Lee SK, Jun JK (2013) Pregnancy-related knowledge, risk perception, and reproductive decision making of women with epilepsy in Korea. Seizure 22(10):834–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2013.07.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lionel AC,Costain G, Monfared N, Walker S, Reuter MS, Hosseini SM et al (2017) Improved diagnostic yield compared with targeted gene sequencing panels suggests a role for whole-genome sequencing as a first-tier genetic test. Genet Med [Online]. Available at: http://www.nature.com/gim/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/gim2017119a.html [accessed: 29th October 2017]
- McLaughlin J, Clavering E, Haimes E, and Wright M (2011) Genetic journeys: key findings from a study of the experiences of families referred to paediatric genetics. Policy, Ethics and Life Sciences Research Centre, Newcastle University. Available at: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/peals/assets/publications/Peals-ResearchReportA5spreads.pdf [Accessed 3/07/2015]
- Shiloh S, Gerad L, Goldman B (2006) The facilitating role of information provided in genetic counseling for counselees’ decisions. Genetics in Medicine 8(2):116–124. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.gim.0000196823.50502.a4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Smith JA, Osborn M (2008) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: Smith J (ed) Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods, 2nd edn. Sage, London, pp 53–80Google Scholar