"Are we not going too far?": Socio-ethical considerations of preimplantation genetic testing using polygenic risk scores according to healthcare professionals.

Attitudes Ethics Europe North-America Polygenic risk scores Preimplantation genetic testing Qualitative methods Reproductive genetics

Journal

Social science & medicine (1982)
ISSN: 1873-5347
Titre abrégé: Soc Sci Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8303205

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
17 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 22 05 2023
revised: 08 01 2024
accepted: 11 01 2024
medline: 21 1 2024
pubmed: 21 1 2024
entrez: 20 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The recent introduction of polygenic risk scores within preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-P) has been met with many concerns. To get more insights into the perspectives of relevant stakeholders on the socio-ethical aspects of PGT-P, an interview study with 31 healthcare professionals involved in reproductive medicine and genetics in Europe and North-America was performed. Healthcare professionals in our study were concerned that PGT-P was going too far in terms of selection, with regards to both medical conditions and non-medical traits. Healthcare professionals were worried about the ethical 'slippery slope' of PGT-P, the increasing medicalization of reproductive health, the commercial context of PGT-P, and potential stigmatization and discrimination. There were also concerns that the availability and the 'technological imperative' of PGT-P could lead to pressure and a sense of responsibility for parents to use PGT-P. Additionally, it could cause new anxieties about the child's health before the child has even been born. Since PGT-P provides polygenic risk scores before birth, the autonomy of the child has to be considered. These socio-ethical concerns heighten existing debates regarding reproductive genetic technologies and show that the specifics of PGT-P make this screening option especially ethically controversial.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38244362
pii: S0277-9536(24)00043-1
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116599
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

116599

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Auteurs

Maria Siermann (M)

Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7 - Box 7001, 3000, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8 (P.O. Box 63), 00014, Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: maria.siermann@kuleuven.be.

Ophelia Valcke (O)

Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7 - Box 7001, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Joris Robert Vermeesch (JR)

Laboratory for Cytogenetics and Genome Research, Department of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, ON1 Herestraat 49 - Bus 606, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Taneli Raivio (T)

Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 8 (P.O. Box 63), 00014, Helsinki, Finland.

Olga Tšuiko (O)

Laboratory for Cytogenetics and Genome Research, Department of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, ON1 Herestraat 49 - Bus 606, 3000, Leuven, Belgium; Reproductive Genetics Unit, Center for Human Genetics, UZ Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Pascal Borry (P)

Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7 - Box 7001, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Classifications MeSH