Weil Jon, Ormond Kelly, Peters June, Peters Kathryn, Biesecker Barbara Bowles, LeRoy Bonnie
Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
J Genet Couns. 2006 Apr;15(2):85-93. doi: 10.1007/s10897-005-9008-1.
Nondirectiveness has been a guiding principle for genetic counseling since the founding of the profession. However, its efficacy and appropriateness in this role have been frequently questioned. A workshop at the 2003 Annual Education Conference of the National Society of Genetic Counselors provided audience participation in a discussion of these issues. Participants presented arguments for and against nondirectiveness as a central ethos. They described complex personal transitions in adapting what they had learned about nondirectiveness during training to the realities of the workplace. There was support for flexible approaches to genetic counseling, with varying adherence to nondirectiveness, based on client and family needs and values, clinical circumstances, and desired counseling outcomes. The discussion supports the use of clinical experience, outcomes research, and the experience of other professions to move beyond nondirectiveness and more accurately identify the theoretical bases that underlie genetic counseling in the variety of circumstances in which it is currently practiced.
自遗传咨询行业创立以来,非指导性一直是该行业的指导原则。然而,它在这一角色中的有效性和适用性经常受到质疑。在2003年全国遗传咨询师协会年度教育会议上举办的一次研讨会,让与会者参与了对这些问题的讨论。参与者就支持和反对将非指导性作为核心理念提出了论据。他们描述了在将培训中学到的非指导性知识应用于工作实际情况时所经历的复杂个人转变。基于客户和家庭的需求与价值观、临床情况以及期望的咨询结果,大家支持采用灵活的遗传咨询方法,对非指导性的遵循程度也各不相同。该讨论支持利用临床经验、结果研究以及其他行业的经验,超越非指导性,更准确地确定当前遗传咨询在各种实际情况下所依据的理论基础。