Newborn screening: new developments, new dilemmas

Scientific and technological advances are lending pressure to expand the scope of newborn screening. Whereas this has great potential for improving child health, it also challenges our current perception of such programmes. Standard newborn screening programmes are clearly justified by the fact that...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of medical ethics 2005-07, Vol.31 (7), p.393-398
Main Authors: Kerruish, N J, Robertson, S P
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bioethics
Child health
Consent
Diabetes
Diabetes Mellitus - genetics
Diabetes Mellitus - prevention & control
Diagnosis
Disease
Ethical aspects
Ethics
Genetic Predisposition to Disease
Genetic screening
Genetic Testing - ethics
Genetic Testing - methods
Genetics
Health screening
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Infant, Newborn, Diseases - diagnosis
Infants
Infants (Newborn)
Informed Consent
Infrastructure
Laboratories
Medical care
Medical diagnosis
Medical genetics
Medical screening
Morbidity
Mortality
Neonatal screening
Neonatal Screening - ethics
Newborn infants
newborn screening
Newborns
Parents
Parents - psychology
Personal Autonomy
Phenylketonuria
Phenylketonurias - diagnosis
Population
predictive genetic testing
Prenatal development
Screening tests
Social Justice - ethics
Type 1 diabetes mellitus
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Scientific and technological advances are lending pressure to expand the scope of newborn screening. Whereas this has great potential for improving child health, it also challenges our current perception of such programmes. Standard newborn screening programmes are clearly justified by the fact that early detection and treatment of affected individuals avoids significant morbidity and mortality. However, proposals to expand the scope and complexity of such testing are not all supported by a similar level of evidence for unequivocal benefit. We argue that screening for genetic susceptibility to complex disorders is inherently different from standard screening and, while of potential value, must be considered separately from conventional testing.
ISSN:0306-6800
1473-4257
DOI:10.1136/jme.2004.008219