Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jan;25(1):17-21.
doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2016.125. Epub 2016 Sep 28.

Advantages of expanded universal carrier screening: what is at stake?

Affiliations

Advantages of expanded universal carrier screening: what is at stake?

Sanne van der Hout et al. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Jan.

Abstract

Expanded universal carrier screening (EUCS) entails a twofold expansion of long-standing (preconception) carrier screening programmes: it not only allows the simultaneous screening of a large list of diseases ('expanded'), but also refers to a pan-ethnic screening offer ('universal'). Advocates mention three main moral advantages of EUCS as compared with traditional (targeted and/or ancestry-based) forms of carrier screening: EUCS will (1) maximise opportunities for autonomous reproductive choice by informing prospective parents about a much wider array of reproductive risks; (2) provide equity of access to carrier testing services; (3) reduce the risk of stigmatisation. This empirical ethics study aims to widen this account and provide a balanced picture of the potential pros and cons of EUCS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 health (policy) professionals and representatives of patient organisations about their views on carrier screening including a possible EUCS scenario. Stakeholders acknowledged the potential benefits of EUCS, but also expressed five main moral concerns: (1) Does EUCS respond to an urgent problem or population need? (2) Is it possible to offer couples both understandable and sufficient information about EUCS? (3) How will societal views on 'reproductive responsibility' change as a result of EUCS? (4) Will EUCS lead to a lower level of care for high-risk populations? (5) Will EUCS reinforce disability-based stigmatisation? While having the potential to overcome some moral limits inherent in traditional carrier screening, EUCS comes with moral challenges of its own. More research is needed to (further) anticipate the ethical and practical consequences of EUCS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

KH and LH are affiliated to a University Hospital that offers expanded carrier screening. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic overview of the different types of (preconception) carrier screening, including examples.

References

    1. Lakeman P, Plass AMC, Henneman L, Bezemer PD, Cornel MC, Ten Kate LP: Preconceptional ancestry-based carrier couple screening for cystic fibrosis and haemoglobinopathies: what determines the intention to participate or not and actual participation? Eur J Hum Genet 2009; 17: 999–1009. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nazareth SB, Lazarin GA, Goldberg JD: Changing trends for genetic carrier screening in the United States. Prenat Diag 2015; 35: 931–935. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cousens NE, Gaff CL, Metcalfe SA et al: Carrier screening for Beta-thalassaemia: a review of international practice. Eur J Hum Gen 2010; 18: 1077–1083. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kaback MM: Population-based genetic screening for reproductive counseling: the Tay Sachs disease model. Eur J Pediatr 2000; 159 (Suppl 3): S192–S195. - PubMed
    1. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists’ Committee on Genetics: ACOG Committee Opinion no. 486. Update on Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 1028–1031. - PubMed

Publication types