Skip to main content
Log in

Ethical issues in newborn screening and the impact of new technologies

  • Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Pediatrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Medical ethics is an integral part of medical practice. The general principles are well known: autonomy (the right to choose), beneficence (do good), non-maleficence (do no harm), and justice (be fair and equitable). In newborn screening these principles must be especially carefully applied, as the intervention, screening, has not been sought by the patient, but is a form of preventive medicine.In proposing a screening programme questions to be asked are: should we do it? (is there enough benefit, not too much harm?); can we do it? (do we have the technology and skill to find the cases sought); can we afford it? The first question, with its ethical implications, is often ignored. New issues have arisen with new technology, but underlying ethical themes are the same. Tandem mass spectrometry can be used to detect about 30 very rare disorders in a single test. Proving the benefit of this (and other screening tests) is difficult because randomised controlled trials seem impractical, because of power considerations, long follow-up time, and because there is already a perceived benefit. Best possible evidence of a lower order must be sought. In future, DNA microarray technology is likely to become sufficiently inexpensive to apply to newborn screening. It is difficult to predict all the future possibilities of DNA technology in this fast-moving field. Major ethical problems are likely with the ability to detect adult-onset disorders or susceptibility to these in babies. Under what circumstances would this be ethical? We need to start debating these issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

GA2 :

glutaric aciduria type 2

MCAD :

medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency

MS/MS :

tandem mass spectrometry

PKU :

phenylketonuria

References

  1. Anon (2000) Proposed international guidelines on ethical issues in medical genetics and genetics services. WHO/HGN/GL/ETH/98 1

  2. Anon (2000) Serving the family from birth to the medical home. A report from the Newborn Screening Task Force convened in Washington DC, May 10–11, 1999. Pediatrics 106: 383–427

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Beauchamp T, Childress J (1994) Principles of biomedical ethics, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, New York

  4. Bradley DM, Parsons EP, Clarke AJ (1993) Experience with screening newborns for Duchenne muscular dystrophy in Wales. BMJ 306: 357–360

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carpenter K, Wiley V, Sim KG, Heath D, Wilcken B (2001) Evaluation of newborn screening for medium chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency in 275,000 babies. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed 85: F105–F109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilcken B, Wiley V, Hammond J, Carpenter K (2003) Screening newborns for inborn errors of metabolism by tandem mass spectrometry. N Engl J Med 348: 2300–2308

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chatfield S, Owen G, Ryley HC, Williams J, Alfaham M, Goodchild MC, Weller P (1991) Neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis in Wales and the West Midlands: clinical assessment after five years of screening. Arch Dis Child 66: 29–33

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Farrell PM, Kosorok MR, Rock MJ, Laxova A, Zeng L, Lai HC, Hoffman G, Laessig RH, Splaingard ML (2001) Early diagnosis of cystic fibrosis through neonatal screening prevents severe malnutrition and improves long-term growth. Wisconsin Cystic Fibrosis Neonatal Screening Study Group. Pediatrics 107: 1–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lees CM, Davies S, Dezateux C (2000) Neonatal screening for sickle cell disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD001913

  10. Leonard JV, Dezateux C (2002) Screening for inherited metabolic disease in newborn infants using tandem mass spectrometry. BMJ 324: 4–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pollitt RJ, Green A, McCabe CJ, Booth A, Cooper NJ, Leonard JV, Nicholl J, Nicholson P, Tunaley JR, Virdi NK (2001) Neonatal screening for inborn errors of metabolism: cost, yield and outcome. Health Technol Assess 1: 1–202

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pourfarzam M, Morris A, Appleton M, Craft A, Bartlett K (2001) Neonatal screening for medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency. Lancet 358: 1063–1064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Seymour CA, Thomason MJ, Chalmers RA, Addison GM, Bain MD, Cockburn F, Littlejohns P, Lord J, Wilcox AH (2001) Newborn screening for inborn errors of metabolism: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 1: 1–95

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sorenson JR, Levy HL, Mangione TW, Sepe SJ (1984) Parental response to repeat testing of infants with ‘false-positive’ results in a newborn screening program. Pediatrics 73: 183–187

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sveger T, Thelin T (1981) Four-year-old children with alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency. Clinical follow-up and parental attitudes towards neonatal screening. Acta Paediatr Scand 70: 171–177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wald NJ, Morris JK (1998) Neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis. BMJ 316: 404–405

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wilcken B (2001) Rare diseases and the assessment of intervention: what sorts of clinical trials can we use? J Inherit Metab Dis 24: 291–298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wilcken B, Chalmers G (1986) Reduced morbidity in cystic fibrosis. Lancet 1: 439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wilcken B, Wiley V, Sherry G, Bayliss U (1995) Neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis: a comparison of two strategies for case detection in 1.2 million babies. J Pediatr 127: 965–970

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilson JMG, Jungner G (1968) Principles and practice of screening for disease. World Health Organization, Geneva

  21. Yap S, Naughten E (1998) Homocystinuria due to cystathionine beta-synthase deficiency in Ireland: 25 years’ experience of a newborn screened and treated population with reference to clinical outcome and biochemical control. J Inherit Metab Dis 21: 738–747

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bridget Wilcken.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilcken, B. Ethical issues in newborn screening and the impact of new technologies. Eur J Pediatr 162 (Suppl 1), S62–S66 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-003-1355-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-003-1355-z

Keywords

Navigation