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
. 2018 Mar 5;12(1):12.
doi: 10.1186/s40246-018-0144-8.

Attitudes of stakeholders in psychiatry towards the inclusion of children in genomic research

Anna Sundby  1   2 , Merete Watt Boolsen  3 , Kristoffer Sølvsten Burgdorf  4 , Henrik Ullum  4 , Thomas Folkmann Hansen  5   6   7 , Ole Mors  8   5
Affiliations

Attitudes of stakeholders in psychiatry towards the inclusion of children in genomic research

Anna Sundby et al. Hum Genomics. .

Abstract

Background: Genomic sequencing of children in research raises complex ethical issues. This study aims to gain more knowledge on the attitudes towards the inclusion of children as research subjects in genomic research and towards the disclosure of pertinent and incidental findings to the parents and the child.

Methods: Qualitative data were collected from interviews with a wide range of informants: experts engaged in genomic research, clinical geneticists, persons with mental disorders, relatives, and blood donors. Quantitative data were collected from a cross-sectional web-based survey among 1227 parents and 1406 non-parents who were potential stakeholders in psychiatric genomic research.

Results: Participants generally expressed positive views on children's participation in genomic research. The informants in the qualitative interviews highlighted the age of the child as a critical aspect when disclosing genetic information. Other important aspects were the child's right to an autonomous choice, the emotional burden of knowing imposed on both the child and the parents, and the possibility of receiving beneficial clinical information regarding the future health of the child. Nevertheless, there was no consensus whether the parent or the child should receive the findings. A majority of survey stakeholders agreed that children should be able to participate in genomic research. The majority agreed that both pertinent and incidental findings should be returned to the parents and to the child when of legal age. Having children does not affect the stakeholder's attitudes towards the inclusion of children as research subjects in genomic research.

Conclusion: Our findings illustrate that both the child's right to autonomy and the parents' interest to be informed are important factors that are found valuable by the participants. In future guidelines governing children as subjects in genomic research, it would thus be essential to incorporate the child's right to an open future, including the right to receive information on adult-onset genetic disorders.

Keywords: Attitude; Child; Ethics research; Mental disorders; Minors; Whole genome sequencing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Verbal consent was obtained from each informant before the interview. All participation in the current study was voluntary. All names and personal data were removed from the transcription of the qualitative interviews in order to safeguard the anonymity of the informants.

The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (file no. 2007-58-015). As all data are based on anonymous interviews and survey information, no other ethical clearance was required according to the Committee on Health Research Ethics in the Capital Region of Denmark (file no. H-4_2013_FSP-051).

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of attitudes towards the return of pertinent findings to children or parents distributed on parents and non-parents, N and %
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flowchart of attitudes towards the return of incidental findings to children or parents distributed on parents and non-parents, N and %
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Christenhusz GM, Devriendt K, Dierickx K. To tell or not to tell? A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. Eur J Hum Genet. 2013;21:248–255. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2012.130. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Klitzman R, Appelbaum PS, Fyer A, Martinez J, Buquez B, Wynn J, et al. Researchers’ views on return of incidental genomic research results: qualitative and quantitative findings. Genet Med. 2013;15:888–895. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.87. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Middleton A, Morley KI, Bragin E, Firth HV, Hurles ME, Wright CF, et al. Attitudes of nearly 7000 health professionals, genomic researchers and publics toward the return of incidental results from sequencing research. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24:21–29. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.58. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Parens E, Appelbaum P, Chung W. Incidental findings in the era of whole genome sequencing? Hastings Cent Rep. 2013;43:16–19. doi: 10.1002/hast.189. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ryan KA, De Vries RG, Uhlmann WR, Roberts JS, Gornick MC. Public’s views toward return of secondary results in genomic sequencing: It’s (almost) all about the choice. J Genet Couns. 2017;26:1197–1212. doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0095-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types