Taylor Ann T S, Rogers Jill Cellars
Department of Chemistry, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana 47933, USA.
Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2011 Jul;39(4):253-60. doi: 10.1002/bmb.20521.
The development of classroom experiments where students examine their own DNA is frequently described as an innovative teaching practice. Often these experiences involve students analyzing their genes for various polymorphisms associated with disease states, like an increased risk for developing cancer. Such experiments can muddy the distinction between classroom investigation and medical testing. Although the goals and issues surrounding classroom genotyping do not directly align with those of clinical testing, instructors can use the guidelines and standards established by the medical genetics community when evaluating the ethics of human genotyping. We developed a laboratory investigation and discussion which allowed undergraduate science students to explore current DNA manipulation techniques to isolate their p53 gene, followed by a dialogue probing the ethical implications of examining their sample for various polymorphisms. Students never conducted genotyping on their samples because of the ethical concerns presented in this paper, so the discussion replaced the actual genetic testing in the class. A science faculty member led the laboratory portion, while a genetic counselor facilitated the discussion of the ethical concepts underlying genetic counseling: autonomy, beneficence, confidentiality, and justice. In their final papers, students demonstrated an understanding of the practice guidelines established by the genetics community and acknowledged the ethical considerations inherent in p53 genotyping. Given the burgeoning market for personalized medicine, teaching undergraduates about the psychosocial and ethical dimensions of human genetic testing is important and timely. Moreover, incorporating a genetic counselor in the classroom discussion provided a rich and dynamic discussion of human genetic testing.
开展让学生检测自身DNA的课堂实验,常被视为一种创新教学实践。这类体验通常包括让学生分析自身基因中与疾病状态相关的各种多态性,比如患癌风险增加。此类实验可能会模糊课堂调查与医学检测之间的界限。尽管围绕课堂基因分型的目标和问题与临床检测的目标和问题并不直接一致,但教师在评估人类基因分型的伦理问题时,可以采用医学遗传学领域制定的指导方针和标准。我们开展了一项实验室调查与讨论活动,让本科理科学生探索当前的DNA操作技术来分离他们的p53基因,随后进行一场对话,探讨检测样本中各种多态性的伦理意义。由于本文所提出的伦理问题,学生们从未对自己的样本进行基因分型,因此讨论取代了课堂上实际的基因检测。一位理科教师负责指导实验部分,同时一名遗传咨询师协助讨论基因咨询背后的伦理概念:自主性、 beneficence(此处原文有误,可能是beneficence,意为有益、行善)、保密性和公正性。在他们的期末论文中,学生们展示了对遗传学领域制定的实践指南的理解,并认识到p53基因分型中固有的伦理考量。鉴于个性化医疗市场的蓬勃发展,向本科生传授人类基因检测的心理社会和伦理层面的知识既重要又及时。此外,在课堂讨论中加入一名遗传咨询师,能为人类基因检测带来丰富而活跃的讨论。