Abstract
Advances in technology, especially DNA sequencing, have greatly increased the potential capacity of genetic screening in public health programs. In contrast to the reactive nature of most health professional activities, where professionals respond to the preexisting concerns of their patients, in screening it is the professionals who are proactive in approaching individuals who, until that point, have regarded themselves as “healthy” or “well”: the goal is to identify latent disease or future risk of disease. This is usually performed on population subgroups (often based on age, gender, and ethnicity). Screening programs include newborn, antenatal, carrier status, and disease susceptibility screening. The scope of screening has extended from the use of relatively simple and inexpensive screening tests for highly treatable conditions to a complex and diverse range of program screening for rare disorders or using complex algorithms to infer clinically relevant information, as with fetal DNA in maternal plasma.
Long-established screening criteria are being challenged by the increased capacities of laboratory systems, especially the use of high-throughput DNA sequencing. This blurs the formerly fairly clear distinction between reactive, diagnostic testing and proactive screening tests. This distinction breaks down when genome-wide methods are employed as the favored laboratory method in the diagnostic assessment of a wide range of disorders. The test being used in a diagnostic process yields up information that is incidental to the diagnostic question, so that the diagnostic test has now become also a genome-wide screening test.
This article examines the recent history of screening criteria and summarizes the ethical issues related to genetic and genomic screening.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andermann, A., Blancquaert, I., Beauchamp, S., & Déry, V. (2008). Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: A review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 86(4), 317–319.
Chadwick, R. (2011). The communitarian turn: Myth or reality? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 20, 546–553.
Chadwick, R., Capps, B., Chalmers, D., Clarke, A., Clayton, E. W., Liu, E., Lysaght, T., Mulvihill, J. J., & Winslet, M. (2013). Imagined futures: Capturing the benefits of genome sequencing for society. Human Genome Organisation.
de Wert, G. M., Dondorp, W. J., & Knoppers, B. M. (2012). Preconception care and genetic risk: Ethical issues. Journal of Community Genetics, 3(3), 221–228.
Green, R. C., Berg, J. S., Grody, W. W., Kalia, S. S., Korf, B. R., Martin, C. L., McGuire, A., Nussbaum, R. L., O’Daniel, J. M., Ormond, K. E., Rehm, H. L., Watson, M. S., Williams, M. S., & Biesecker, L. G. (2013). ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genetics in Medicine, 15(7), 565–574. Published online 22 Mar 2013.
Howard, H. C., Knoppers, B. M., Cornel, M. C., Clayton, E. W., Senecal, K., & Borry P. (2015). Whole-genome sequencing in newborn screening? A statement on the continued importance of targeted approaches in newborn screening programmes. European Journal of Human Genetics. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.289. [Epub ahead of print].
Human Genetics Commission. (2006). Making babies. London: Department of Health.
Kingsmore, S. F. (2013). Incidental swimming with millstones. Science Translational Medicine, 5(194), 194ed10. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3006900. PMID: 23863830.
Leib, J. R., Gollust, S. E., Hull, S. C., & Wilfond, B. S. (2005). Carrier screening panels for Ashkenazi Jews: Is more better? Genetics in Medicine, 7(3), 185–190.
McClellan, K. A., Avard, D., Simard, J., & Knoppers, B. M. (2013). Personalized medicine and access to health care: Potential for inequitable access? European Journal of Human Genetics, 21(2), 143–147.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2006). Genetic screening: A supplement to the 1993 report by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2010). Medical profiling and online medicine: The ethics of ‘personalised healthcare’ in a consumer age. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
Wilson, J. M. G., & Jungner, G. (1968). Principals and practice of screening for disease. Geneva: WHO. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/37650/1/WHO_PHP_34.pdf. Last accessed 14 July 2015.
Further Readings
Clarke, A. J. (2014). Managing the ethical challenges of next generation sequencing in genomic medicine. British Medical Bulletin, 111(1), 17–30.
Timmermans, S., & Buchbander, M. (2012). Saving babies? The consequences of newborn genetic screening. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Yurkiewicz, I. R., et al. (2014). Prenatal whole genome sequencing: Is the quest to know a fetus future ethical? Obstetrical and Gynecology Survey, 69(4), 197–199.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this entry
Cite this entry
Burke, K., Clarke, A. (2016). Genetic Screening. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09483-0_212
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09483-0_212
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09482-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09483-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities