Yarborough M, Scott J A, Dixon L K
Theor Med. 1989 Jun;10(2):139-49. doi: 10.1007/BF00539879.
The popular view of non-directive genetic counseling limits the counselor's role to providing information to clients and assisting families in making decisions in a morally neutral fashion. This view of non-directive genetic counseling is shown to be incomplete. A fuller understanding of what it means to respect autonomy shows that merely respecting client choices does not exhaust the duty. Moreover, the genetic counselor/client relationship should also be governed by the counselor's commitment to the principle of beneficence. When non-directive counseling is reexamined in light of both these principles, it becomes clear that there are cases in which counselors should attempt to persuade clients to reconsider their decisions. Such attempts are consistent with non-directive counseling because, while respecting the clients' decision-making authority, they insure that clients act with full knowledge of the moral consequences of their decisions.
非指导性遗传咨询的普遍观点将咨询者的角色局限于向客户提供信息，并协助家庭以道德中立的方式做出决策。事实证明，这种非指导性遗传咨询的观点是不完整的。对尊重自主性的更全面理解表明，仅仅尊重客户的选择并不能完全履行这一职责。此外，遗传咨询者与客户的关系还应受咨询者对行善原则的承诺的约束。当根据这两个原则重新审视非指导性咨询时，很明显，在某些情况下，咨询者应该试图说服客户重新考虑他们的决定。这种尝试与非指导性咨询是一致的，因为在尊重客户决策权威的同时，它们确保客户在充分了解其决定的道德后果的情况下行事。
