Table 3.

(Potential) negative and positive societal implications of EUCS identified in review.

(Potential) negative implications	Empirical evidence found in searcha
Medicalization
Supply push	No evidence found in search
Routinization	Evidence for [55]
Slippery slope	No evidence found in search
Stigmatization
Reinforcement of disability-based stigmatization	No evidence found in search
Stigmatization of carriers/couples opting out of screening	Evidence for [5–7, 21, 32, 55] Evidence against [42, 43, 57]
Discrimination
Discrimination of carrier couples	Evidence for [5, 21, 32] Evidence against [42, 43, 57]
Discrimination of people living with the conditions screened	No evidence found in search
Achieving equal access
Awareness high-risk groups undermined by universal offer	No evidence found in search
Reaching target population (unplanned pregnancies, inadequate information provision)	No evidence found in search
Costs & funding: couples perceived barriers regarding paying for screening	Evidence for [21, 48]
(Potential) positive implications
Stigmatization
Reduce stigmatization of ethnic groups	No evidence found in search
Achieving equal access
Equal access for high-risk groups and the general population	No evidence found in search
Other
Achieving equal access
Costs & funding: cost-effectiveness/fair allocation of healthcare resources	No evidence found in search

EUCS expanded universal carrier screening.

^aEmpirical evidence for societal implications was only found in relation to high-risk offers (often for one or few conditions), except for the study of Van Dijke et al. [48].