Value neutrality in genetic counseling: an unattained ideal.
Beginning with a discussion of why value neutrality on the part of the genetics counselor does not necessarily preserve autonomy of the counselee, the idea that social values unavoidably underlie the articulation of risks and benefits of genetic testing is made explicit. Despite the best efforts of a counselor to convey "value neutral" facts, risk assessment by the counselee and family is done according to normative analysis, experience with illness, and definitions of health. Each of these factors must be known by the genetic counselor in order to relate those facts which she acknowledges as relevant to the decisions that will be made by those people seeking the genetic information. Concisely, the scope of this paper includes the role of the genetic counselor in facilitating a family planning decision-making process. In the expression of genetic risks, the authority of medical language impacts a person's understanding of epidemiological data. By claiming that "value neutrality" is an ethos of genetic counselors, this implies that there exists a distinction between these scientific facts and personal values; this assumption is fallacious and should not be promoted to patients as a truth within the professional ethos statement of genetic counseling.
Rentmeester
C A
CA
Department of Philosophy, 801 McClung Tower, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-0480, USA. CRENTMEE@UTK.EDU
D003657:Decision Making; D005817:Genetic Counseling / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D030342:Genetic Diseases, Inborn / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005820:Genetic Testing; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D011369:Professional-Patient Relations; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D012945:Social Values