P559: The impact of patient race and polygenic risk scores on genetic counselors’ risk assessment and management in breast cancer vignettes

widespread, it is critical to shift towards a more inclusive and supportive narrative that embraces genetic diversity as part of the human experience rather than something to be fixed.Methods: This presentation draws on a combination of qualitative data from interviews with families affected by genetic differences and a review of current literature on the psychological and social impacts of genetic diagnoses.We analyzed the language used in clinical settings and public discourse around common genetic variations, focusing on how it shapes perceptions and outcomes.Additionally, we examined case studies where strengths-based approaches to early intervention were implemented, assessing their impact on health outcomes, inclusion, and equity.Results: Our findings reveal that pathological language surrounding genetic diagnoses can have several harmful effects: Psychological Impact: Families often report feelings of fear, stigma, and isolation upon receiving a diagnosis framed in negative terms.This can delay acceptance and proactive engagement with early interventions. Missed Opportunities: Overemphasis on deficits can overshadow the potential for strengths-based interventions that focus on individual abilities rather than limitations.This leads to missed opportunities for optimizing developmental outcomes. Increased Stigmatization: Pathological framing amplifies societal stigma, hindering inclusion efforts and perpetuating inequities in healthcare, education, and social services. Diagnostic Delays: In some cases, the negative framing of genetic differences contributes to prolonged diagnostic odysseys or even lifelong absence of diagnosis due to fear or misunderstanding. Systemic Burden: The cumulative effect of stigmatization and missed interventions places an avoidable burden on healthcare systems, educational institutions, and social services. Conclusion:The current approach to communicating genetic diagnoses often does more harm than good by reinforcing negative stereotypes and limiting opportunities for positive outcomes.To address this issue, we propose five actionable steps for the clinical and genomic community to minimize harm and maximize benefits: 1. Adopt Strengths-Based Language: Shift from deficit-focused language to terms that highlight individual strengths and potential.2. Promote Early Intervention: Encourage early strengths-based interventions that support developmental growth rather than focusing solely on managing deficits.3. Educate Healthcare Providers: Train clinicians to use inclusive language that fosters hope and empowerment rather than fear.4. Engage Communities: Work with affected families and communities to co-create narratives that celebrate diversity.5. Support Long-Term Inclusion: Develop policies that promote equity in access to healthcare, education, and social services for individuals with genetic differences.By embracing these strategies, we can help transform the perception of genetic differences from a "life sentence" into an opportunity for a fulfilling life, ultimately fostering greater inclusion and equity across society.