Genetic Counseling

  • Sarah Hutchings Clark


Genetic counseling is a complex, fascinating, and continuously evolving field. With the current focus of science and popular culture on genetics, genetic counseling is becoming increasingly important in medicine. Genetic counselors are increasingly found in a wide variety of settings in clinical, research, and administrative roles. Furthermore, genetic counselors can contribute significantly not just in the setting of prenatal genetics but also in the pediatric and adult arenas. Counselors not only play a vital role in explaining genetic concepts, recurrence risks, and genetic testing in understandable terms but also in helping individuals anticipate and cope with the psychosocial consequences that can be associated with the diagnosis of a genetic condition.


Genetic Counselor Down Syndrome Chromosome Abnormality Turner Syndrome Williams Syndrome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    National Society of Genetic Counselors. Genetic counseling as a profession. NSGC; 1983.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Resta RG. The historical perspective: Sheldon Reed and 50 years of genetic counseling. J Genet Couns. 1997;6(4):375–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walker AP. The practice of genetic counseling. In: Baker DL, Schuette JL, Uhlmann WR, editors. A guide to genetic counseling. New York: Wiley-Liss; 1998. p. 1–20.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heimler A. An oral history of the national society of genetic counselors. J Genet Couns. 1997;6(3):315–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bennett RL, Steinhaus KA, Uhrich SB, O’Sullivan CK, Resta RG, Lochner-Doyle D, Markel DS, Vincent V, Hamanishi J. Recommendations for standardized human pedigree nomenclature. J Genet Couns. 1995;4(4):267–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bennett RL, Steinhaus French K, Resta RG, Lochner Doyle D. Standardized human pedigree nomenclature: update and assessment of the recommendations of the national society of genetic counselors. J Genet Couns. 2008;17:424–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Resta RG. The Crane’s foot: the rise of the pedigree in human genetics. J Genet Couns. 1993;2(4):235–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nussbaum RL, McInnes RR, Willard HF. Thompson & Thompson genetics in medicine. 6th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goyette RE. Hematology: a comprehensive guide to the diagnosis & treatment of blood disorders. Los Angeles: Practice Management Information Corporation; 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bennett RL, Motulsky AG, Bittles A, Hudgins L, Uhrich S, Lochner Doyle D, Silvey K, Scott CR, Cheng E, McGillivray B, Steiner RD, Olson D. Genetic counseling and screening of consanguineous couples and their offspring: recommendations of the national society of genetic counselors. J Genet Couns. 2002;11(2):97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hook EB. Rates of chromosomal abnormalities at different maternal ages. Obstet Gynecol. 1981;58(3):282–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Morris JK, Wald NJ, Mutton DE, Alberman E. Comparison of models of maternal age-specific risk for Down syndrome live births. Prenat Diagn. 2003;23:252–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cuckle HA, Wald NJ, Thompson SC. Estimating a woman’s risk of having a pregnancy associated with Down’s syndrome using her age and serum alpha-fetoprotein level. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1987;94:387.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. ACOG practice bulletin number 88. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(6):1459–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    American College of Medical Genetics. Multiple marker screening in women 35 and older. ACMG Policy Statement; 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    American College of Medical Genetics. Screening for fetal aneuploidy and neural tube defects. ACMG practice guideline. Genet Med. 2009;11(11):818–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    American College of Medical Genetics. Statement on guidance for genetic counseling in advanced paternal age. ACMG practice guideline. Genet Med. 2008;10(6):457–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gardner RJM, Sutherland GR. Chromosome abnormalities and genetic counseling. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Practical genetic evaluation and counseling for infertile couples. ASRM and SREI Practice Committee Report; 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cooley WC, Graham JM. Common syndromes and management issues for primary care physicians: down syndrome-an update and review for the primary pediatrician. Clin Pediatr. 1991;30(4):233–53.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jones KL. Smith’s Recognizable patterns of human malformation. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders Company; 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Milunsky A, editor. Genetic disorders and the fetus. 5th ed. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McDonald-McGinn DM, Emanuel BS, Zackai EH. 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. GeneReviews. December 16, 2005.;part=gr_22q11deletion. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  24. 24.
    Cassidy SB, Schwartz S. Prader-Willi syndrome. GeneReviews. September 3, 2009.;part=pws. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  25. 25.
    Williams CA, Dagli AI, Driscoll DJ. Angelman syndrome. GeneReviews. September 5, 2008.;part=angelman. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  26. 26.
    Morris CA. Williams syndrome. GeneReviews. April 21, 2006.;part=williams. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  27. 27.
    Smith ACM, Boyd K, Elsea SH, Finucane BM, Haas-Givler B, Gropman A, Johnson KP, Lupski JR, Magenis E, Potocki L, Solomon B. Smith-Magenis syndrome. GeneReviews. January 7, 2010.;part=sms. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  28. 28.
    Dobyns WB, Das S. LIS1-associated lissencephaly/subcortical band heterotopia. GeneReviews. March 3, 2009.;part=chrom17-lis. Accessed 17 May 2010.
  29. 29.
    Rossi E, Piccini F, Zollino M, Neri G, Caselli D, Tenconi R, Castellan C, Carrozzo R, Danesino C, Zuffardi O, Ragusa A, Castiglia L, Galesi O, Greco D, Romano C, Pierluigi M, Perfumo C, Di Rocco M, Faravelli F, Dagna Bricarelli F, Bonaglia M, Bedeschi M, Borgatti R. Cryptic telomeric rearrangements in subjects with mental retardation associated with dysmorphism and congenital malformations. J Med Genet. 2001;38:417–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Knight SJ, Regan R, Nicod A, Horsley SW, Kearney L, Homfray T, Winter RM, Bolton P, Flint J. Subtle chromosomal rearrangements in children with unexplained mental retardation. Lancet. 1999;354:1676–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    de Vries BBA, White SM, Knight SJ, Regan R, Homfray T, Young ID, Super M, McKeown C, Splitt M, Quarrell OW, Trainer AH, Niermeijer MF, Malcolm S, Flint J, Hurst JA, Winter RM. Clinical studies on submicroscopic subtelomeric rearrangements: a checklist. J Med Genet. 2001;38(3):145–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Linden MG, Bender BG, Robinson A. Intrauterine diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87(3):468–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Caughey AB, Hopkins LM, Norton ME. Chorionic villus sampling compared with amniocentesis and the differences in the rate of pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:612–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Robinson WP, Barrett IJ, Bernard L, Telenius A, Bernasconi F, Wilson RD, Best RG, Howard-Peebles PN, Langlois S, Kalousek DK. Meiotic origin of trisomy in confined placental mosaicism is correlated with presence of fetal uniparental disomy, high levels of trisomy in trophoblast, and increased risk of fetal intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Hum Genet. 1997;60:917–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wolstenholme J, Rooney DE, Davison EV. Confined placental mosaicism, IUGR, and adverse pregnancy outcome: a controlled retrospective U.K. Collaborative survey. Prenat Diagn. 1994;14:345–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Divane A, Carter NP, Spathas DH, Ferguson-Smith MA. Rapid prenatal diagnosis of aneuploidy from uncultured amniotic fluid cells using five-colour fluorescence in situ hybridization. Prenat Diagn. 1994;14:1061–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Philip J, Bryndorf T, Christensen B. Prenatal aneuploidy detection in interphase cells by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Prenat Diagn. 1994;14:1203–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Witters I, Devriendt K, Legius E, Matthijs G, Van Schoubroeck D, Van Assche FA, Fryns J-P. Rapid prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 21 in 5049 consecutive uncultured amniotic fluid samples by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). Prenat Diagn. 2002;22:29–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    American College of Medical Genetics. Technical and clinical assessment of fluorescence in situ hybridization: an ACMG/ASHG position statement. I. Technical considerations. Genet Med. 2000;2(6):356–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. ACOG Practice Bulletin 77; 2007.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Krantz DA, Hallahan TW, Orlandi F, Buchanan P, Larsen JW, Macr JN. First-trimester down syndrome screening using dried blood biochemistry and nuchal translucency. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(2):207–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Spencer K. Age related detection and false positive rates when screening for Down’s Syndrome in the first trimester using fetal nuchal translucency and maternal serum free βhCG and PAPP-A. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;108:1043–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Orlandi F, Damiani G, Hallahan TW, Krantz DA, Macri JN. First-trimester screening for fetal aneuploidy: biochemistry and nuchal translucency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997;10:381–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Senat MV, De Keersmaecker B, Audibert F, Montcharmont G, Frydman R, Ville Y. Pregnancy outcome in fetuses with increased nuchal translucency and normal karyotype. Prenat Diagn. 2002;22:345–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nicolaides KH, Heath V, Cicero S. Increased fetal nuchal translucency at 11–14 weeks. Prenat Diagn. 2002;22:308–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Souka AP, Krampl E, Bakalis S, Heath V, Nicolaides KH. Outcome of pregnancy in chromosomally normal fetuses with increased nuchal translucency in the first trimester. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:9–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nicolaides KH, Sebire NJ, Snijders RJM. The 11–14 week scan: the diagnosis of fetal abnormalities. New York: The Parthenon Publishing Group; 1999.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wald NJ, Watt HC, Hackshaw AK. Integrated screening for down’s syndrome based on tests performed during the first and second trimesters. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(7):461–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Feuchtbaum LB, Currier RJ, Lorey FW, Cunningham GC. Prenatal ultrasound findings in affected and unaffected pregnancies that are screen-positive for trisomy 18: the California experience. Prenat Diagn. 2000;20:293–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bromley B, Lieberman E, Shipp TD, Benacerraf BR. The genetic sonogram: a method of risk assessment for down syndrome in the second trimester. J Ultrasound Med. 2002;21:1087–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hook EB, Topol BB, Cross PK. The natural history of cytogenetically abnormal fetuses detected at midtrimester amniocentesis which are not terminated electively: new data and estimates of the excess and relative risk of late fetal death associated with 47,+21 and some other abnormal karyotypes. Am J Hum Genet. 1989;45(6):855–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Christian SM, Koehn D, Pillay R, MacDougall A, Wilson RD. Parental decisions following prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidy: a trend over time. Prenat Diagn. 2000;20:37–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chang HJ, Clark RD, Bachman H. The phenotype of 45,X/46,XY mosaicism: an analysis of 92 prenatally diagnosed cases. Am J Hum Genet. 1990;46:156–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hsu LYF. Prenatal diagnosis of 45,X/46,XY mosaicism-a review and update. Prenat Diagn. 1989;9:31–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Warburton D. De novo balanced chromosome rearrangements and extra marker chromosomes identified at prenatal diagnosis: clinical significance and distribution of breakpoints. Am J Hum Genet. 1991;49(5):995–1013.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wallerstein R, Yu M-T, Neu RL, Benn P, Bowen CL, Crandall B, Disteche C, Donahue R, Harrison B, Hershey D, Higgins RR, Jenkins LS, Jackson-Cook C, Keitges E, Khodr G, Lin CC, Luthardt FW, Meisner L, Mengden G, Patil SR, Rodriguez M, Sciorra LJ, Shaffer LG, Stetten G, Van Dyke DL, Wang H, Williams F, Zaslav A-L, Hsu LYF. Common trisomy mosaicism diagnosed in amniocytes involving chromosomes 13, 18, 20 and 21: karyotype-phenotype correlations. Prenat Diagn. 2000;20:103–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hsu LYF, Yu M-T, Richkind KE, Van Dyke DL, Crandall BF, Saxe DF, Khodr GS, Mennuti M, Stetten G, Miller WA, Priest JH. Incidence and significance of chromosome mosaicism involving an autosomal structural abnormality diagnosed prenatally through amniocentesis: a collaborative study. Prenat Diagn. 1996;16:1–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hsu LYF, Yu M-T, Neu RL, Van Dyke DL, Benn PA, Bradshaw CL, Shaffer LG, Higgins RR, Khodr GS, Morton CC, Wang H, Brothman AR, Chadwick D, Disteche CM, Jenkins LS, Kalousek DK, Pantzar TJ, Wyatt P. Rare trisomy mosaicism diagnosed in amniocytes, involving an autosome other than chromosomes 13, 18, 20, and 21: karyotype/phenotype correlations. Prenat Diagn. 1997;17(3):201–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hsu LYF, Perlis TE. United states survey on chromosome mosaicism and pseudomosaicism in prenatal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn. 1984;4:97–130.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ungerleider S. Update and review: supernumerary marker chromosomes. J Genet Couns. 2000;9(4):347–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    American College of Medical Genetics. Use of array-based technology in the practice of medical genetics. ACMG practice guidelines. Genet Med. 2007;9(9):650–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Array comparative genomic hybridization in prenatal diagnosis. ACOG committee opinion number 446. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(5):1161–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    American College of Medical Genetics. Microarray analysis for constitutional cytogenetic abnormalities. ACMG standards and guidelines. Genet Med. 2007;9(9):654–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    de Vries BB, Pfundt R, Leisink M, Koolen DA, Vissers LE, Janssen IM, et al. Diagnostic genome profiling in mental retardation. Am J Hum Genet. 2005;77:606–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Le Caignec C, Boceno M, Saugier-Veber P, Jacquemont S, Joubert M, David A, Frebourg T, Rival JM. Detection of genomic imbalances by array based comparative genomic hybridization in fetuses with multiple malformations. J Med Genet. 2005;42:121–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mefford HC, Sharp AJ, Baker C, Itsara A, Jiang Z, Buysse K, et al. Recurrent rearrangements of chromosome 1q21.1 and variable pediatric phenotypes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1685–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Advanced Obstetrics and GynecologyStamford HospitalStamfordUSA

Personalised recommendations