What are the ethical issues involved in noninvasive prenatal testing in Japan?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nobuhiro Suzumori
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

scholarly journals Prenatal screening diagnosis and management in the era of coronavirus: the Sardinian experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (9) ◽  
pp. 943-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Monni ◽  
Valentina Corda ◽  
Ambra Iuculano
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Screening ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
World Health ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing ◽  
The North ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Slight Rise ◽  
Health Organization

AbstractSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a new coronavirus, was first identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China and spread rapidly, affecting many other countries. The disease is now referred to as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).The Italian government declared a state of emergency on 31st January 2020 and on 11th March World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the COVID-19 outbreak a global pandemic. Although the COVID-19 incidence remained considerably lower in Sardinia than in the North Italy regions, which were the most affected, the field of prenatal screening and diagnosis was modified because of the emerging pandemic. Data on COVID-19 during pregnancy are so far limited. Since the beginning of the emergency, our Ob/Gyn Department at Microcitemico Hospital, Cagliari offered to pregnant patients all procedures considered essential by the Italian Ministry of Health. To evaluate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the activities of our center, we compared the number of procedures performed from 10th March to 18th May 2020 with those of 2019. Despite the continuous local birth rate decline, during the 10-week pandemic period, we registered a 20% increment of 1st trimester combined screening and a slight rise of the number of invasive prenatal procedures with a further increase in chorionic villi sampling compared to amniocentesis. Noninvasive prenatal testing remained unvariated. The request for multifetal pregnancy reduction as a part of the growing tendency of voluntary termination of pregnancy in Sardinia increased. The COVID-19 pandemic provides many scientific opportunities for clinical research and study of psychological and ethical issues in pregnant women.

Parenting the Child With Down Syndrome: Understanding—but Going Beyond—the “Down Syndrome Advantage”

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Hodapp ◽  
Ellen G. Casale
Keyword(s):  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Down Syndrome ◽  
Behavior Problems ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Facial Features ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing ◽  
Birth Parents ◽  
Children With Down Syndrome

Compared to parents of children with other types of intellectual disabilities, parents of children with Down syndrome experience less stress and more rewards, although this “Down syndrome advantage” mostly occurs compared to parents of children with autism and before groups are equated. Behaviorally, children with Down syndrome display more sociable interactional styles and baby-faced facial features, along with fewer instances of severe behavior problems. Demographically, parents of children with (versus without) Down syndrome average 5 years older when giving birth; parents are more often well educated, married, of higher socioeconomic status, and they likely provide these children greater financial and cultural resources. In most industrialized societies, rates of Down syndrome seem steady, with easily available, noninvasive prenatal testing counteracted by increasing numbers of women giving birth at older ages. Parenting children with Down syndrome relates to characteristics of children, their parents, and society, all of which intersect in important, underexplored ways.

Jacobsen Syndrome Detected by Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

2015 ◽  
Vol 125 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie O. Lo ◽  
Cori D. Feist ◽  
Jason Hashima ◽  
Brian L. Shaffer
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing ◽  
Jacobsen Syndrome

scholarly journals Expanded noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy and copy number variations and parental willingness for invasive diagnosis in a cohort of 18,516 cases

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yunsheng Ge ◽  
Jia Li ◽  
Jianlong Zhuang ◽  
Jian Zhang ◽  
Yanru Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Copy Number ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Copy Number Variations ◽  
Trisomy 13 ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Parental Willingness

Abstract Background Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been wildly used to screen for common aneuplodies. In recent years, the test has been expanded to detect rare autosomal aneuploidies (RATs) and copy number variations (CNVs). This study was performed to investigate the performance of expanded noninvasive prenatal testing (expanded NIPT) in screening for common trisomies, sex chromosomal aneuploidies (SCAs), rare autosomal aneuploidies (RATs), and copy number variations (CNVs) and parental willingness for invasive prenatal diagnosis in a Chinese prenatal diagnosis center. Methods A total of 24,702 pregnant women were retrospectively analyzed at the Women and Children’s Hospital from January 2013 to April 2019, among which expanded NIPT had been successfully conducted in 24,702 pregnant women. The high-risk expanded NIPT results were validated by karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray analysis. All the tested pregnant women were followed up for pregnancy outcomes. Results Of the 24,702 cases, successful follow-up was conducted in 98.77% (401/446) of cases with common trisomies and SCAs, 91.95% (80/87) of RAT and CNV cases, and 76.25% (18,429/24,169) of cases with low-risk screening results. The sensitivity of expanded NIPT was 100% (95% confidence interval[CI], 97.38–100%), 96.67%(95%CI, 82.78–99.92%), and 100%(95%CI, 66.37–100.00%), and the specificity was 99.92%(95%CI, 99.87–99.96%), 99.96%(95%CI, 99.91–99.98%), and 99.88% (95%CI, 99.82–99.93%) for the detection of trisomies 21, 18, and 13, respectively. Expanded NIPT detected 45,X, 47,XXX, 47,XXY, XYY syndrome, RATs, and CNVs with positive predictive values of 25.49%, 75%, 94.12%, 76.19%, 6.45%, and 50%, respectively. The women carrying fetuses with Trisomy 21/Trisomy 18/Trisomy 13 underwent invasive prenatal diagnosis and terminated their pregnancies at higher rates than those at high risk for SCAs, RATs, and CNVs. Conclusions Our study demonstrates that the expanded NIPT detects fetal trisomies 21, 18, and 13 with high sensitivity and specificity. The accuracy of detecting SCAs, RATs, and CNVs is still relatively poor and needs to be improved. With a high-risk expanded NIPT result, the women at high risk for common trisomies are more likely to undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis procedures and terminate their pregnancies than those with unusual chromosome abnormalities.

Prenatal Genetic Screening, Epistemic Justice, and Reproductive Autonomy

Hypatia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Amber Knight ◽  
Joshua Miller
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Medical Professionals ◽  
Reproductive Decisions ◽  
Reproductive Autonomy ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing ◽  
Epistemic Justice ◽  
Reproductive Decision Making ◽  
Testimonial Injustice ◽  
And Control

AbstractNoninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) promises to enhance women's reproductive autonomy by providing genetic information about the fetus, especially in the detection of genetic impairments like Down syndrome (DS). In practice, however, NIPT provides opportunities for intensified manipulation and control over women's reproductive decisions. Applying Miranda Fricker's concept of epistemic injustice to prenatal screening, this article analyzes how medical professionals impair reproductive decision-making by perpetuating testimonial injustice. They do so by discrediting positive parental testimony about what it is like to raise a child with DS. We argue that this testimonial injustice constitutes a twofold harm: (1) people with DS and their family members who claim that parenting a child with DS may be a rewarding and joyous experience are harmed when they are systematically silenced, disbelieved, and/or denied epistemic credibility by medical professionals, and (2) pregnant women are harmed since they might make poorly informed choices without access to all relevant information. The broader implication of the analysis is that epistemic justice is a precondition of reproductive autonomy. We conclude by calling for federal oversight of the acquisition and dissemination of information that prospective parents receive following a positive diagnosis of DS to ensure that it is comprehensive and up to date.

scholarly journals Sex selection and non‐invasive prenatal testing: A review of current practices, evidence, and ethical issues

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 398-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilary Bowman‐Smart ◽  
Julian Savulescu ◽  
Christopher Gyngell ◽  
Cara Mand ◽  
Martin B. Delatycki
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Sex Selection ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Current Practices

scholarly journals Emerging Considerations for Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 946-953 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nichole Korpi-Steiner ◽  
Rossa W K Chiu ◽  
Subhashini Chandrasekharan ◽  
Lyn S Chitty ◽  
Mark I Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document