The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review
Since 2019, England, France and Germany have started offering NIPT as a publicly funded second-tier test for common chromosomal aneuploidies (trisomy 21, 18 and/or 13). Despite these benefits, the introduction of NIPT into routine prenatal care also raises a number of ethical concerns. In this paper...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2021
|
| _version_ | 1797107013453348864 |
|---|---|
| author | Perrot, A Horn, R |
| author_facet | Perrot, A Horn, R |
| author_sort | Perrot, A |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Since 2019, England, France and Germany have started offering NIPT as a publicly funded second-tier test for common chromosomal aneuploidies (trisomy 21, 18 and/or 13). Despite these benefits, the introduction of NIPT into routine prenatal care also raises a number of ethical concerns. In this paper, we analyse how these issues are discussed differently across countries, echoing the different socio-political particularities and value-systems that shape the use and regulation of NIPT in a specific country. The international comparison between England, France and Germany shows how each country defines the principle of reproductive autonomy and weighs it against other principles and values, such as, human dignity, disability rights and the duty of care of health professionals. In terms of methodology, our literature review focuses on arguments and regulations of prenatal testing and reproductive choices (specifically on NIPT), through the investigation of regulatory, parliamentary, scientific, medical, association, institutional and media sources. The comparative review helps to better understand ethical questions discussed with regard to NIPT, and, more broadly, to prenatal genomic testing, and the limits associated with reproductive autonomy in the three countries studied. Whereas reproductive autonomy is valued in each country, it is understood and implemented differently depending on the socio-cultural context, and on what other principles are evoked and how they are defined. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:10:36Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:4d9aa319-9008-4a21-b334-ef8dd41f4c7d |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:10:36Z |
| publishDate | 2021 |
| publisher | Springer Nature |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:4d9aa319-9008-4a21-b334-ef8dd41f4c7d2022-06-17T08:09:22ZThe ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature reviewJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:4d9aa319-9008-4a21-b334-ef8dd41f4c7dEnglishSymplectic ElementsSpringer Nature2021Perrot, AHorn, RSince 2019, England, France and Germany have started offering NIPT as a publicly funded second-tier test for common chromosomal aneuploidies (trisomy 21, 18 and/or 13). Despite these benefits, the introduction of NIPT into routine prenatal care also raises a number of ethical concerns. In this paper, we analyse how these issues are discussed differently across countries, echoing the different socio-political particularities and value-systems that shape the use and regulation of NIPT in a specific country. The international comparison between England, France and Germany shows how each country defines the principle of reproductive autonomy and weighs it against other principles and values, such as, human dignity, disability rights and the duty of care of health professionals. In terms of methodology, our literature review focuses on arguments and regulations of prenatal testing and reproductive choices (specifically on NIPT), through the investigation of regulatory, parliamentary, scientific, medical, association, institutional and media sources. The comparative review helps to better understand ethical questions discussed with regard to NIPT, and, more broadly, to prenatal genomic testing, and the limits associated with reproductive autonomy in the three countries studied. Whereas reproductive autonomy is valued in each country, it is understood and implemented differently depending on the socio-cultural context, and on what other principles are evoked and how they are defined. |
| spellingShingle | Perrot, A Horn, R The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review |
| title | The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review |
| title_full | The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review |
| title_fullStr | The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review |
| title_full_unstemmed | The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review |
| title_short | The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature review |
| title_sort | ethical landscape s of non invasive prenatal testing in england france and germany findings from a comparative literature review |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT perrota theethicallandscapesofnoninvasiveprenataltestinginenglandfranceandgermanyfindingsfromacomparativeliteraturereview AT hornr theethicallandscapesofnoninvasiveprenataltestinginenglandfranceandgermanyfindingsfromacomparativeliteraturereview AT perrota ethicallandscapesofnoninvasiveprenataltestinginenglandfranceandgermanyfindingsfromacomparativeliteraturereview AT hornr ethicallandscapesofnoninvasiveprenataltestinginenglandfranceandgermanyfindingsfromacomparativeliteraturereview |