Should the scope of NIPT be limited by a ‘threshold of seriousness’?

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has the potential to screen for a wider range of genetic conditions than is currently possible at an early stage of pregnancy and with minimal risks. As such, there have been calls to apply a 'threshold of seriousness' to limit the scope of conditions being tested. This approach is based on concerns about society at large and the potential impact on specific groups within it. In this paper, we argue that limiting the scope of NIPT using the criterion of 'seriousness' is arbitrary, potentially stigmatises certain disabilities over others and fails to respect reproductive autonomy. We contend that concerns about expanded NIPT are more appropriately addressed by the provision of adequate information, counselling and consent procedures. We recommend a decision-making process that helps healthcare providers support prospective parents to make informed decisions about the nature and scope of NIPT screening based on their own values and social context. In addition to addressing concerns about expanded NIPT screening, this process would help clinicians to obtain legally valid consent and discharge their duty of care (including the duty to inform) in the prenatal context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Human Genetics
Published
2024-08-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-024-01684-x
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.33

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Should the scope of NIPT be limited by a ‘threshold of seriousness’?

Michelle Taylor‐Sands, Molly Johnston, Catherine Mills
3 citations
European Journal of Human Genetics
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
3.33
article

Should the scope of NIPT be limited by a ‘threshold of seriousness’?

Michelle Taylor‐Sands, Molly Johnston, Catherine Mills
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has the potential to screen for a wider range of genetic conditions than is currently possible at an early stage of pregnancy and with minimal risks. As such, there have been calls to apply a 'threshold of seriousness' to limit the scope of conditions being tested. This approach is based on concerns about society at large and the potential impact on specific groups within it. In this paper, we argue that limiting the scope of NIPT using the criterion of 'seriousness' is arbitrary, potentially stigmatises certain disabilities over others and fails to respect reproductive autonomy. We contend that concerns about expanded NIPT are more appropriately addressed by the provision of adequate information, counselling and consent procedures. We recommend a decision-making process that helps healthcare providers support prospective parents to make informed decisions about the nature and scope of NIPT screening based on their own values and social context. In addition to addressing concerns about expanded NIPT screening, this process would help clinicians to obtain legally valid consent and discharge their duty of care (including the duty to inform) in the prenatal context.

European Journal of Human GeneticsVol. 33(2)
The University of Melbourne (AU), Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU), Monash University (AU)
Monash University
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
3.33
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Should the scope of NIPT be limited by a ‘threshold of seriousness’? — Michelle Taylor‐Sands, Molly Johnston, et al. · European Journal of Human Genetics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS