Ader Tammy, Susswein Lisa R, Callanan Nancy P, Evans James P
Genetic Counseling Program, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.
J Genet Couns. 2009 Dec;18(6):606-17. doi: 10.1007/s10897-009-9250-z. Epub 2009 Oct 2.
Patients and clinicians alike view anonymous testing as a potential way to avoid perceived risks of genetic testing such as insurance and employment discrimination and the potential loss of privacy. To assess their experience with and attitudes towards anonymous testing for BRCA1/2, genetic counselors were invited to complete an internet-based survey via the NSGC Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group (FCRC-SIG) listerv. A majority of the 115 respondents (70%) had received requests from patients for anonymous BRCA1/2 testing at some point in their careers and 43% complied with this request. Most counselors, however, encountered such requests infrequently, 1-5 times per year. Although genetic counselors do not generally encourage anonymous testing and over a third of respondents feel it should never be offered, a substantial subset support its use under specific circumstances. In general, a strong consensus exists among counselors that anonymous testing should not be offered routinely. In light of the current legislative landscape, it is of note that a substantial proportion of respondents (42.7%) cited the threat of life insurance discrimination as a reason for pursuing AT, and fewer cited health insurance (30.0%) or employment discrimination (29.1%) as justifications. Since there exists no federal legislative protections against discrimination by life insurance companies, it makes sense that genetic counselors were more responsive to this issue as opposed to the threat of discrimination in health insurance and employment.
患者和临床医生都将匿名检测视为一种潜在方式,以规避基因检测所带来的可感知风险,如保险和就业歧视以及隐私的潜在丧失。为了评估他们对BRCA1/2匿名检测的体验和态度,基因咨询师受邀通过NSGC家族性癌症风险咨询特别兴趣小组(FCRC-SIG)的邮件列表完成一项基于网络的调查。115名受访者中的大多数(70%)在其职业生涯的某个阶段收到过患者对BRCA1/2匿名检测的请求,其中43%的人满足了这一请求。然而,大多数咨询师很少遇到此类请求,每年1至5次。尽管基因咨询师一般不鼓励匿名检测,超过三分之一的受访者认为绝不应该提供匿名检测,但有相当一部分人支持在特定情况下使用匿名检测。总体而言,咨询师们普遍强烈认为不应常规提供匿名检测。鉴于当前的立法形势,值得注意的是,相当一部分受访者(42.7%)将人寿保险歧视的威胁作为进行匿名检测的一个理由,而将健康保险(30.0%)或就业歧视(29.1%)作为理由的较少。由于不存在针对人寿保险公司歧视行为的联邦立法保护,基因咨询师对这个问题的反应比对健康保险和就业歧视威胁的反应更强烈是有道理的。