Abstract
Three recent reports on genetic screening published in the United Kingdom, Denmark and the Netherlands are discussed. Comparison of the Dutch report with the Danish and the Nuffield reports reveals that the Dutch report focuses on the aim of enlarging the scope for action, emphasising protection of autonomy and self-determination of the screenee more than the other two reports. The three reports have in common that the main concern is with concrete issue such as stigmatisation, discrimination, protection of the private sphere and issues linked with labour and insurance. Some potential long term consequences, however, tend to be neglected or underestimated. These omissions are pointed out.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Gillon R. Ethics of genetic screening: the first report of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics. J Med Ethics. 1994 Jun;20(2):67-8, 92. doi: 10.1136/jme.20.2.67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shapiro D. The ethics of genetic screening: the first report of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics: another personal view. J Med Ethics. 1994 Sep;20(3):185–187. doi: 10.1136/jme.20.3.185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]