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
. 1997 Aug;87(8):1280-8.
doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.8.1280.

Public participation in medical policy-making and the status of consumer autonomy: the example of newborn-screening programs in the United States

Affiliations

Public participation in medical policy-making and the status of consumer autonomy: the example of newborn-screening programs in the United States

E H Hiller et al. Am J Public Health. 1997 Aug.

Abstract

Objectives: State newborn-screening programs collectively administer the largest genetic-testing initiative in the United States. We sought to assess public involvement in formulating and implementing medical policy in this important area of genetic medicine.

Methods: We surveyed all state newborn-screening programs to ascertain the screening tests performed, the mechanisms and extent of public participation, parental access to information, and policies addressing parental consent or refusal of newborn screening. We also reviewed the laws and regulations of each state pertaining to newborn screening.

Results: Only 26 of the 51 state newborn-screening programs reported having advisory committees that include consumer representation. Fifteen states reported having used institutional review boards, another venue for public input. The rights and roles of parents vary markedly among newborn-screening programs in terms of the type and availability of screening information as well as consent-refusal and follow-up policies.

Conclusions: There is clear potential for greater public participation in newborn-screening policy-making. Greater public participation would result in more representative policy-making and could enhance the quality of services provided by newborn-screening programs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Genetic screening and public health.
    Holtzman NA. Holtzman NA. Am J Public Health. 1997 Aug;87(8):1275-7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.8.1275. Am J Public Health. 1997. PMID: 9279259 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Houst Law Rev. 1992 Spring;29(1):85-148 - PubMed
    1. Science. 1995 Jul 21;269(5222):291 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 1973 Feb 8;288(6):318-9 - PubMed
    1. Science. 1976 Oct 1;194(4260):29-35 - PubMed
    1. Am J Public Health. 1982 Dec;72(12):1396-400 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms