Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The principle of nondirectiveness in genetic counseling. Different meanings and various postulates of normative nature

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article aims at organizing multifaceted discourse on the concept of nondirectiveness in the practice of genetic counseling. The analysis of areas where nondirectiveness was invoked and discussed reveals the problematic confusion of different meanings of the term that often leads to false conclusions about the relations between the professional standards and the practice of genetic counseling. The article offers clear and comprehensive description of different approaches to nondirectiveness and various ideas associated with the term. Normative consequences of various meanings attributed to nondirectiveness are explored. The article concludes by presenting important but unsolved problems regarding both theory (the meaning of nondirectiveness and its operational definition) and practice of genetic counseling (the scope and content of the norm of nondirective counseling).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. See for example the report by the Task Force of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology that cites professional statements on that issue (Dondorp et al. 2013).

  2. See for example the statement by the American Society of Human Genetics (Botkin et al. 2015) or by the European Society of Human Genetics (Borry et al. 2009).

References

  • Austin, Jehannine, Alicia Semaka, and George Hadjipavlou. 2014. Conceptualizing genetic counseling as psychotherapy in the era of genomic medicine. Journal of Genetic Counseling 23 (6): 903–909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9728-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesecker, Barbara. 2000. Reproduction, ethics, the ethics of reproductive genetic counseling: nondirectiveness. In Encyclopedia of ethical, legal, and policy issues in biotechnology, ed. T.J. Murray and M.J. Mehlman, 977–83. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borry, Pascal, Gerry Evers-Kiebooms, Marina C. Cornel, Angus Clarke, and Kris Dierickx. 2009. Genetic testing in asymptomatic minors: Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. European Journal of Human Genetics 17 (6): 720–721. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2009.26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosk, Charles. 1993. The workplace ideology of genetic counselors. In Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, ed. D.M. Bartels, B.S. LeRoy, and A.L. Caplan, 25–37. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botkin, Jeffrey R., John Belmont, W., Berg, Jonathan S., Berkman, Benjamin E., Bombard, Yvonne, Holm, Ingrid. A., Levy, Howard P., Ormond, Kelly, Saal, Howard, M., Spinner, Nancy, B., Wilfond, Benjamin, S., and McInerney, Joseph, D. 2015. Points to consider: Ethical, legal, and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. The American Journal of Human Genetics 97 (1): 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2015.05.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, Meredith, and Aliza Kolker. 1994. Variation in content in prenatal genetic counseling interviews. Journal of Genetic Counseling 3: 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01414604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, Alan. 1993. Neutrality is not morality: The ethics of genetic counseling. In Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, ed. D.M. Bartels, B.S. LeRoy, and A.L. Caplan, 149–165. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Angus. 1997. The process of genetic counseling: Beyond non-directiveness. In Genetics, society and clinical practice, ed. P.S. Harper and A.J. Clarke, 179–200. Oxford: BIOS Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djurdjinovic, Luba. 1998. Psychosocial counseling. In A guide to genetic counseling, ed. D.L. Baker, J.L. Schuette, and W.R. Uhlmann, 127–166. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djurdjinovic, L., and J. Peters. 2017. Special Issue Introduction: Dealing with psychological and social complexity in genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling 26 (2): 195–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-017-0080-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dondorp, W., G. De Wert, G. Pennings, F. Shenfield, P. Devroey, B. Tarlatzis, P. Barri, and K. Diedrich. 2013. ESHRE task force on ethics and law 20: Sex selection for non-medical reasons. Human Reproduction 28 (6): 1448–1454. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekwo, Edem, Jae-On. Kim, Gosselink Carol, Jonh Opitz, and James Reynolds. 1987. Parental perceptions of the burden of genetic disease. American Journal of Medical Genetics 28: 955–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320280422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eunpu, Deborah. 1997. Systemically-based psychotherapeutic techniques in genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling 6: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025630917735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frets, Petra, Hugo Duivenvoorden, Frans Verhage, Martinus Niermeijer, Sophie van de Berge, and Galjaard Hans. 1990. Factors influencing the reproductive decision after genetic counseling. American Journal of Medical Genetics 1990 (35): 496–502. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320350411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frets, Petra, and Martinus Niermeijer. 1990. Reproductive planning after genetic counseling: A perspective from the last decade. Clinical Genetics 38: 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.1990.tb03584.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes Shepherd, R., T.K. Browne, and L. Warwick. 2017. A relational approach to genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Journal of Genet Counseling 26 (2): 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10897-016-0022-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Rodney. 1991. The new genetics: A challenge to traditional medicine. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians London 25: 134–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsia, Edward. 1979. The genetic counselor as information giver. In Genetic counseling: Facts, values, and norms, ed. A.M. Capron, 169–186. New York: Alan R. Liss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamal, Leila, Will Schupmann, and Benjamin E. Berkman. 2020. An ethical framework for genetic counseling in the genomic era. Journal of Genetic Counseling 29 (5): 718–727. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, Daniel, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky. 1982. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, Seymour, ed. 1979. Genetic counseling: Psychological dimensions. New York: Academic Press, Available from: https://www.gceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ACGC-Core-Competencies-Brochure_15_Web_REV-6-2019.pdf.

  • Kessler, Seymour. 1997a. Psychological aspects of genetic counselling. IX. Teaching and counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling 6 (3): 287–95. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025676205440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, Seymour. 1997b. Psychological aspects of genetic counselling. XI. Nondirectiveness revisited. American Journal of Medical Genetics 72: 164–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leroy, Bonnie. 1993. When theory meets practice: Challenges to the field of genetic counseling. In Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, ed. D.M. Bartels, B.S. LeRoy, and A.L. Caplan, 39–54. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippman-Hand, Abby, and Clarke Fraser. 1979. Genetic counseling - The post-counseling period: II. Making reproductive choices. American Journal of Medical Genetics 4: 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320040109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, Joan. 1993. The training of genetic counselors: origins of a psychosocial model. In Prescribing our future. Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, ed. D.M. Bartels, B.S. LeRoy, and A.L. Caplan, 15–24. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy Veach, Patricia, Bonnie S. LeRoy, and Dianne M. Bartels. 2003. Facilitating the genetic counseling process: A manual for practice. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meiser, Bettina, Jennifer Irle, Elizabeth Lobb, and Kristine Barlow-Stewart. 2008. Assessment of the content and process of genetic counseling: A critical review of empirical studies. Journal of Genetic Counseling 17 (5): 434–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michie, Susan, Faye Bron, Martin Bobrow, and Theresa M. Marteau. 1997. Nondirectiveness in genetic counseling: An empirical study. Amercian Journal of Human Genetics 60 (1): 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-008-9173-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Society of Genetic Counselors. 2018. National society of genetic counselors code of ethics. Journal of Genetic Counseling 27 (1): 6–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-017-0166-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ormond, Kelly, Mercy Ygona Laurino, Kristine Barlow-Stewart, Tina-Marie. Wessels, Shelley Macaulay, Jehannine Austin, and Anna Middleton. 2018. Genetic counseling globally: Where are we now? American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C 178 (1): 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.c.31607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, Rayna. 1988. Chromosomes and communication: The discourse of genetic counseling. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 2 (2): 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1525/maq.1988.2.2.02a00040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rentmeester, Christy. 2001. Value neutrality in genetic counseling: An unattained ideal. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (1): 47–51. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009972728031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resta, Robert. 1997. Eugenics and nondirectiveness in genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 6 (2): 255–258. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025624505382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resta, Robert, Barbara Bowles Biesecker, Robin L. Bennett, Sandra Blum, Susan Estabrooks Hahn, Michelle N. Strecker, and Janet L. Williams. 2006. A new definition of genetic counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors’ task force report. Journal of Genetic Counseling 15 (2): 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-005-9014-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Carl. 1967. On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. London: Constable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Carl. 1980. A way of being. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1986. The tentative pregnancy. New York: Viking Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J., A. Virani, and J.C. Austin. 2015. Ethical issues associated with genetic counseling in the context of adolescent psychiatry. Applied & Translational Genomics 5: 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atg.2015.06.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schild, S. 1984. Markers for stress and criteria for ongoing counseling. Birth Defects Original Article Series 20: 107–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiloh, Shoshana, Orit Avdor, and Richard M. Goodman. 1990. Satisfaction with genetic counseling: Dimensions and measurement. American Journal of Medical Genetics 37: 522–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320370419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiloh, Shoshana, and Michal Sagi. 1989. Effect of framing on the perception of genetic recurrence risks. American Journal of Medical Genetics 33: 130–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320330121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, James R. 1993. Genetic counseling: Values that have mattered. In Prescribing our future Ethical challenges in genetic counseling, ed. D.M. Bartels, B.S. LeRoy, and A.L. Caplan, 3–14. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, James R., Carole M. Kavanagh, and Marc Mucatel. 1981. Client learning of risk and diagnosis in genetic counseling. Birth Defects Original Article Series 17 (1): 215–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trepanier, Angela, Mary Ahrens, Wendy McKinnon, June Peters, Jill Stopfer, Sherry Campbell Grumet, Susan Manley, et al. 2004. Genetic cancer risk assessment and counseling: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. Journal of Genetic Counseling 13: 83–114. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOGC.0000018821.48330.77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil, Jon. 2000. Psychosocial genetic counseling. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weil, Jon. 2003. Psychosocial genetic counseling in the post-nondirective era: A point of view. Journal of Genetic Counseling 12 (3): 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023234802124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil, Jon, Kelly Ormond, June Peters, Kathryn Peters, Barbara Bowles Biesecker, and Bonnie LeRoy. 2006. The relationship of nondirectiveness to genetic counseling: Report of a workshop at the 2003 NSGC Annual Education Conference. Journal of Genetic Counseling 15 (2): 85–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertz, Dorothy, and Fletcher James. 2004. Genetics and ethics in global perspective. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wertz, Dorothy, and Fletcher James. 1988. Attitudes of genetic counselors: A multinational survey. American Journal of Human Genetics 42: 592–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertz, Dorothy, James Sorenson, Timothy Heeren, and Opitz John. 1984. Genetic counseling and reproductive uncertainty. American Journal of Medical Genetics 18: 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320180112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertz, Dorothy, James Sorenson, and Timothy Heeren. 1986. Clients’ interpretation of risks provided in genetic counseling. American Journal of Human Genetics 39: 253–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, Richard. 1988. Ethical aspects of genetic disease and genetic counselling. Journal of Medical Ethics 14 (4): 194–97. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.14.4.194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, Mary. 1997. “Respect for autonomy” in genetic counseling: An analysis and a proposal. Journal of Genetic Counseling 6: 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025628322278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yarborough, Mark, Joan Scott, and Linda Dixon. 1989. The role of beneficence in clinical genetics: Non-directive counseling reconsidered. Theor Med 10 (2): 139–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00539879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The research has been funded by Narodowe Centrum Nauki, Poland; the grant number: 2014/15/B/HS1/01651.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy and Bioethics, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Michałowskiego 12, 31-126, Kraków, Poland

    Weronika Chańska

Authors
  1. Weronika Chańska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

WC is the only author for this publication. She takes all responsibility for its content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weronika Chańska.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

No competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chańska, W. The principle of nondirectiveness in genetic counseling. Different meanings and various postulates of normative nature. Med Health Care and Philos 25, 383–393 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-022-10085-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-022-10085-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation