European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume 137, Issue 1 , Pages 3-9 , March 2008

Changing views on the goal of reproductive genetic counselling in Hungary

  • Adél Tóth

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Genetics, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical and Pharmaceutical Centre, University of Szeged, Hungary
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: SZTE ÁOK Orvosi Genetikai Intézet, Somogyi u. 4, 6720 Szeged, Hungary. Tel.: +36 62 545 134; fax: +36 62 545 699.
    • ,
  • Tibor Nyári

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Informatics, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical and Pharmaceutical Centre, University of Szeged, Hungary
    • ,
  • János Szabó

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Genetics, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical and Pharmaceutical Centre, University of Szeged, Hungary

Received 21 March 2006 ,Revised 23 May 2007 ,Accepted 4 October 2007.

References 

  1. Fraser FC. Genetic counseling. Am J Hum Genet. 1974;26:636–659
  2. World Medical Association statement on genetic counseling and genetic engineering. http://www.wma.net/e/policy/c15.htm accessed April 2007.
  3. Caplan AL. Neutrality is not morality: the ethics of genetic counseling. In:  Bartels DM,  LeRoy BS,  Caplan AL editor. Prescribing our future. Ethical challenges in genetic counseling. New York: Aldine de Gruyter; 1993;p. 119–130
  4. Shiloh S. Decision-making in the context of genetic risk. In:  Marteau T,  Richards M editor. The troubled helix: social and psychological implications of the new human genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996;p. 82–103
  5. Anderson G. Nondirectiveness in prenatal genetics: patients read between the lines. Nurs Ethics. 1999;6:126–136
  6. Gervais KG. Objectivity, value neutrality, and nondirectiveness in genetic counseling. In:  Bartels DM,  LeRoy BS,  Caplan AL editor. Prescribing our future. Ethical challenges in genetic counseling. New York: Aldine de Gruyter; 1993;p. 119–130
  7. Rentmeester CA. Value neutrality in genetic counseling: an unattained ideal. Med Health Care Philos. 2001;41:47–51
  8. Shiloh S, Saxe L. Perception of risk in genetic counselling. Psychol Health. 1989;3:45–61
  9. Weil J. Psychosocial genetic counseling in the post-nondirective era: a point of view. J Genet Couns. 2003;12:199–211
  10. White MT. Decision-making through dialogue: reconfiguring autonomy in genetic counseling. Theor Med Bioeth. 1998;19:5–19
  11. Michie M, Bron F, Bobrow M, Marteau TM. Nondirectiveness in genetic counseling: an empirical study. Am J Hum Genet. 1997;60:40–47
  12. Wertz DC, Fletcher JC. Feminist criticism of prenatal diagnosis: a response. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1993;36:541–567
  13. Odoncu FS. The role of non-directiveness in genetic counseling. Med Health Care Phil. 2002;5:53–63
  14. Kosztolányi G. Medical cytogenetics in Hungary. http://www.biologia.uniba.it/eca/NEWSLETTER/NS-9/03.html accessed April 2007.
  15. Czeizel A. The right to be born healthy. The ethical problems of human genetics in Hungary. Budapest, New York: Akadémiai Kiadó, Liss; 1988;pp. 21–40
  16. Czeizel A, Metneki J, Osztovics M. Evaluation of information-guidance genetic counselling. J Med Genet. 1981;2:91–98
  17. Papp Z, Tóth-Pál E, Papp CS. Non-directive prenatal genetic counseling. In:  Kurjak A,  Chervenak FA editor. The fetus as a patient. New York, London: Parthenon; 1994;p. 71–77
  18. Papp Z. Genetikai tanácsadás [Genetic counselling.]. In:  Papp Z editors. Klinikai genetika [Clinical genetics.]. Budapest: Golden Book Kiadó; 1995;p. 316–321
  19. Papp CS, Tóth-Pál E. Genetikai tanácsok gyermeket váró szülőknek [Genetic counselling for prospective parents.]. Budapest: Springer; 2002;
  20. Török O. A genetikai betegségekről általában [On genetic diseases.] http://www.doki.net/tarsasag/genetika/betegtajekoztato.aspx accessed April 2007.
  21. Török O. A genetikai tanácsadás gyakorlata és hatékonysága. Kandidátusi értekezés [Practice and efficacy of genetic counselling. Doctoral dissertation]. Debrecen, 1990.
  22. Rights and obligations of patients. According to Act CLIV of 1997 on Health http://www.szoszolo.hu/53/rights_and_obligations_of_patients.htm accessed April 2007
  23. Tóth A, Szabó J. Miért nem lehetséges a semleges jellegű genetikai tanácsadás? [Why is non-directive genetic counselling impossible?]. Magyar Nőorvosok Lapja. 2005;68:113–120
  24. Rozenberg S, Ham H. Effect of physicians’ opinion on patients’ choice of treatment. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;96:215–217
  25. Tóth A, Szeverényi P. Interpretation in reproductive genetic counselling: a methodological framework. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 2007;28:141–145
  26. Davey A, Rostand K, Harrop K, Goldblatt J, O’Leary P. Evaluating genetic counseling: client expectations, psychological adjustment and satisfaction with service. J Genet Couns. 2005;14:197–206
  27. Bernhardt BA, Biesecker BB, Mastromarino CL. Goals, benefits, and outcomes of genetic counseling: client and genetic counselor assessment. Am J Med Genet. 2000;94:189–197
  28. Michie S, Marteau TM, Bobrow M. Genetic counselling: the psychological impacts of meeting patients’ expectations. J Med Genet. 1997;34:237–241
  29. Seller MJ. Genetic counselling. In:  Gillon R editors. Principles of health care ethics. Chichester, New York: Wiley; 1994;p. 961–970
  30. Wertz DC, Sorenson JR. Client reactions to genetic counseling: self-reports of influence. Clin Genet. 1986;30:494–502

PII: S0301-2115(07)00438-1

doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.10.003

European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume 137, Issue 1 , Pages 3-9 , March 2008

Article Tools