ABSTRACT
In this article, I assess the ethical and legal implications for a progressive and inclusive approach towards people with disability, of providing publicly funded and universal access to carrier testing and expanded carrier testing. In answering this question I focus on two main concerns namely whether such access (1) involves a neoliberal individualisation of risk and responsibility away from the State and (2) might impinge on the reproductive and other rights of people with disability. With respect to this last question I ask specifically is it possible to provide whole-population preconception genetic carrier screening while legally guaranteeing the reproductive rights to conceive of prospective parents, both women and men, who test positive as a carrier for an inheritable genetic condition?
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Valerie Gutenev-Hale for her research assistance, Karen O’Connell and David Ellison for their helpful comments and the useful suggestions of the anonymous reviewers.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1 Medicare usually covers: (i)“free or subsidised treatment by health professionals such as doctors, specialists, optometrists and in specific circumstances dentists and other allied health practitioners and accommodation as a public patient in a public hospital (ii) 75 per cent of the Medicare Schedule fee for services and procedures if you are a private patient in a public or private hospital (does not include hospital accommodation and items such as theatre fees and medicines) and (iii) some health-care services in certain countries: Department of Human Services, ‘Australia’s health 2014’, http://www.aihw.gov.au/australias-health/2014/health-system/
4 Lew et al (Citation2015), p 20. This upsizing has occurred where the DorYeshorim platform is used within orthodox communities in other countries as well. Notably Israel and the USA: see Inthorn (Citation2014).
9 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics ACOG (Citation2011), p 1030.
13 See Karpin and Savell (Citation2012) for a discussion of the controversy surrounding notions of seriousness in testing.
22 The National Health and Medical Council Ethical Guidelines on Assisted Reproduction in Clinical Practice and Research state in paragraph 12.2 that PGD should only be used for the prevention of conditions that seriously harm the person to be born. There is an open question about whether late onset conditions such as breast cancer would fall within that definition. Nevertheless there has been regulatory approval of PGD for BRCA in Victoria and WA and in NSW clinics have interpreted the paragraph as inclusive of BRCA testing. See Karpin and Savell (Citation2012).
23 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth).
24 There has been significant philosophical debate about whether moral value can be attached to the action of avoiding the birth of a child with a disability. In her book Scott (Citation2007) at p 39 provides a critical discussion of the work of Derek Parfit who has suggested that there is no harm where the alternative for a child who would be born with a disability is not to be born. If that child never comes to exist, then there is no person affected by the decision. This is the non-person affecting principle.
25 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Gynaecologists and Human Genetics Society of Australasia (Citation2015), p 14.
27 For a detailed discussion of different government preconception health care initiatives see: Karpin (Citation2010).
30 Bonte et al (Citation2014). The list includes: (1) follow a number of specific dietary prescriptions; (2) take specific supplements; (3) avoid obesity and anorexia; (4) moderate or abstain from use of alcohol, tobacco and various other recreational drugs; (5) avoid specific environmental exposures and chemicals; (6) avoid excessive psychological stress; (7) take specific precautionary measures in case of maternal health problems or when taking medication prior to conception; (8) avoid consanguinity and (in case of suspected risk) undergo genetic screening and if necessary, take appropriate measures, such as using assisted reproduction techniques, choosing a different reproductive partner, or abstaining from reproduction; and (9) last but not least time conception at an ‘optimal age’ via contraception and other means of family planning.
31 Indeed in the now well-known 1991 case of United Auto Workers v Johnson Controls US 111 S Ct 1196 (1991), the United States Supreme Court found that Johnson Controls attempts to stop fertile women working in jobs involving exposure to high levels of lead were in contravention of the anti-discrimination provisions in Title VI. One of the reasons this was found to be discriminatory was that it could not be shown that men were not also similarly affected. Women fought for the right to be exposed because these were some of the best paying jobs and ones with real promotional opportunities.
45 Autism Speaks (date unknown).
54 It should be noted that the proposal by the ACOG Joint Statement that age of onset would be a factor to be considered in any testing protocol might mean that BRCA 1 and 2 would not be included in universal panel testing. Notably, however, PGD is available in Australia to test for the presence of these breast cancer genes in embryos. See, for example, the website of IVF Australia which boasts PGD for BRCA1 and 2, http://ivf.com.au/fertility-treatment/genetic-testing-pgd#what-single-gene-disorders-can-pgd-test-for-.
56 In the US, see Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company v Sheila White 126 S. Ct. 2405 (2006).
57 Genetic Information and Non Discrimination Act (GINA) Pub.L. No, 110-233, 122 Stat. 881 (2008).
Raelia M. Lew et al (2015) ‘Tay-Sachs Disease: Current Perspectives from Australia’ 8 The Application of Clinical Genetics 19. doi: 10.2147/TACG.S49628 Raelia M. Lew et al (2015) ‘Tay-Sachs Disease: Current Perspectives from Australia’ 8 The Application of Clinical Genetics 19. doi: 10.2147/TACG.S49628 Julia Inthorn (2014) ‘Fuzzy Logic and Preconceptional Genetic Carrier Screening’ 1 Archives for the Philosophy and History of Soft Computing 5. Maria Berghs et al (2015) ‘Resignifying the Sickle Cell Gene: Narratives of Genetic Risk, Impairment and Repair’ Health 1. doi:10.1177/1363459315595850 Maria Berghs et al (2015) ‘Resignifying the Sickle Cell Gene: Narratives of Genetic Risk, Impairment and Repair’ Health 1. doi:10.1177/1363459315595850 Komal Bajaj and Susan Gross (2014) ‘Carrier Screening: Past, Present and Future’ 3(3) Journal of Clinical Medicine 1033. doi: 10.3390/jcm3031033 Martin Delatycki et al (2014) ‘Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Population-based Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 17(6) Twin Research and Human Genetics 578. doi: 10.1017/thg.2014.65 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics ACOG (2011) ‘Committee Opinion No. 486: Update on Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 117 Obstetrics and Gynecology 1028. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821922c2 Martin Delatycki et al (2014) ‘Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Population-based Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 17(6) Twin Research and Human Genetics 578. doi: 10.1017/thg.2014.65 Martin Delatycki et al (2014) ‘Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Population-based Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 17(6) Twin Research and Human Genetics 578. doi: 10.1017/thg.2014.65 Lucy Modra et al (2010) ‘Ethical Considerations in Choosing a Model for Population-based Cystic Fibrosis Carrier Screening’ 193(3) Medical Journal of Australia 157. Isabel Karpin and Kristin Savell (2012) Perfecting Pregnancy: Law Disability and the Future of Reproduction, Cambridge University Press. Martin Delatycki et al (2014) ‘Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Population-based Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 17(6) Twin Research and Human Genetics 578. doi: 10.1017/thg.2014.65 Komal Bajaj and Susan Gross (2014) ‘Carrier Screening: Past, Present and Future’ 3(3) Journal of Clinical Medicine 1033. doi: 10.3390/jcm3031033 Janice Edwards et al (2015) ‘Expanded Carrier Screening in Reproductive Medicine—Points to Consider: A Joint Statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine’ 125(3) Obstetrics & Gynecology 653. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000666 Janice Edwards et al (2015) ‘Expanded Carrier Screening in Reproductive Medicine—Points to Consider: A Joint Statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine’ 125(3) Obstetrics & Gynecology 653. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000666 Janice Edwards et al (2015) ‘Expanded Carrier Screening in Reproductive Medicine—Points to Consider: A Joint Statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine’ 125(3) Obstetrics & Gynecology 653. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000666 Martin Delatycki et al (2014) ‘Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Population-based Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 17(6) Twin Research and Human Genetics 578. doi: 10.1017/thg.2014.65 Adrienne Asch (2003) ‘Disability Equality and Prenatal Testing: Contradictory or Compatible?’ 30 Florida State University Law Review 315. Elizabeth Ettorre (2002) Reproductive Genetics, Gender and the Body, Routledge. Erik Parens and Adrienne Asch (2003) ‘Disability Rights Critique of Prenatal Genetic Testing: Reflections and Recommendations’ 9 Mental Retardations and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 40. doi: 10.1002/mrdd.10056 Abby Lippman (1991) ‘Prenatal Genetic Testing and Screening: Constructing Needs and Reinforcing Inequities’ 17(1–2) American Journal of Law and Medicine 15. Jo C. Phelan et al (2013) ‘The Genomic Revolution and Beliefs about Essential Racial Differences: A Backdoor to Eugenics?’ 78(2) American Sociological Review 167. doi: 10.1177/0003122413476034 Isabel Karpin and Kristin Savell (2012) Perfecting Pregnancy: Law Disability and the Future of Reproduction, Cambridge University Press. Rosamund Scott (2007) Choosing Between Possible Lives: Law and Ethics of Prenatal and Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis, Hart Publishing. Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Gynaecologists and Human Genetics Society of Australasia (2015) ‘Prenatal Screening and Diagnosis of Chromosomal and Genetic Abnormalities in the Fetus in Pregnancy: C-Obs 59’. Martin Delatycki et al (2014) ‘Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Population-based Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis’ 17(6) Twin Research and Human Genetics 578. doi: 10.1017/thg.2014.65 Isabel Karpin (2010) ‘Taking Care of the Health of the Preconceived Embryos or Constructing Legal Harm’ in J Nisker, F Baylis, I Karpin, C McLeod & R Mykitiuk (eds), The Healthy Embryo, Cambridge University Press, pp. 136–150. Pieter Bonte et al (2014) ‘Is There a Moral Obligation to Conceive Children under the Best Possible Conditions? A Preliminary Framework for Identifying the Preconception Responsibilities of Potential Parents’ 15(5) BMC Medical Ethics 2. Alana Cattapan et al (2015). ‘Notions of Reproductive Harm in Canadian Law: Addressing Exposures to Household Chemicals as Reproductive Tools’ 1 CJCCL 79. Megan Warin et al (2015) ‘Epigenetics and Obesity the Reproduction of Habitus Through Intracellular and Social Environments’ Body & Society. doi:10.1177/1357034X15590485. Maurizio Meloni (2015) ‘Heredity 2.0: The Epigenetics Effect’ 34(2) New Genetics and Society 117. doi: 10.1080/14636778.2015.1036156 Hannah Landecker and Aaron Panofsky (2013) ‘From Social Structure to Gene Regulation, and Back: A Critical Introduction to Environmental Epigenetics for Sociology’ 39 Annual Review of Sociology 333. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145707 Shannon Sullivan (2013) ‘Inheriting Racist Disparities in Health: Epigenetics and the Transgenerational Effects of White Racism’ 1(2) Critical Philosophy of Race 190. doi: 10.5325/critphilrace.1.2.0190 Arline Geronimus (2013) ‘Deep Integration: Letting the Epigenome Out of the Bottle Without Losing Sight of the Structural Origins of Population Health’ 103(S1) American Journal of Public Health S56. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301380 Michael Rutter (2012) ‘Gene–Environment Interdependence’ 9(4) European Journal of Developmental Psychology 391. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2012.661174 Mark Rothstein et al (2009) ‘The Ghost in Our Genes: Legal and Ethical Implications of Epigenetics’ 19(1) Health matrix 1. Miranda R Waggoner and Tobias Uller (2015) ‘Epigenetic Determinism in Science and Society’ 34(2) New Genetics and Society 177. doi: 10.1080/14636778.2015.1033052 Miranda R Waggoner and Tobias Uller (2015) ‘Epigenetic Determinism in Science and Society’ 34(2) New Genetics and Society 177. doi: 10.1080/14636778.2015.1033052 Bridget Goosby and Chelsea Heidbring (2013) ‘The Transgenerational Consequences of Discrimination on African-American Health Outcomes’ 7(8) Sociology Compass 630. doi: 10.1111/soc4.12054 Sara Wienke et al (2014) ‘Expanded Carrier Screening Panels - Does Bigger Mean Better?’ 5 Journal of Community Genetics 191. doi: 10.1007/s12687-013-0169-6 Michelle McGowan et al (2013) ‘The Changing Landscape of Carrier Screening: Expanding Technology and Options?’ 23(1) Health Matrix Clevel 15. Janice Edwards et al (2015) ‘Expanded Carrier Screening in Reproductive Medicine—Points to Consider: A Joint Statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine’ 125(3) Obstetrics & Gynecology 653. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000666 Jackie Leach Scully (2008) ‘Disability and Genetics in the Era of Genomic Medicine’ 9 Nature Reviews Genetics 797. doi: 10.1038/nrg2453 Jackie Leach Scully (2008) ‘Disability and Genetics in the Era of Genomic Medicine’ 9 Nature Reviews Genetics 797. doi: 10.1038/nrg2453 Sannie Tang et al (2008) ‘Race’ Matters: Racialization and Egalitarian Discourses Involving Aboriginal People in the Canadian Health Care Context’ 13(2) Ethnicity and Health 109. doi: 10.1080/13557850701830307 Brendan Gough (2006) ‘Try to Be Healthy, But Don’t Forgo Your Masculinity: Deconstructing Men’s Health Discourse in the Media’ 63(9) Social Science & Medicine 2476. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.06.004 Joy Johnson et al (2004) ‘Othering and Being Othered in the Context of Health Care Services’ 16(2) Health Communication 255. doi: 10.1207/S15327027HC1602_7 Deborah Tolman et al (2003) ‘Gender Matters: Constructing a Model of Adolescent Sexual Health’ 40(1) Journal of Sex Research 4. doi: 10.1080/00224490309552162 Will Courtenay (2000) ‘Constructions of Masculinity and Their Influence on Men’s Well-Being: A Theory of Gender and Health’ 50(10) Social Science & Medicine 1385. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00390-1 John Constantino and Tony Charman (2012) ‘Gender Bias, Female Resilience, and the Sex Ratio in Autism’ 51(8) Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 756. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2012.05.017 Eva Gillis-Buck and Sarah Richardson (2014) ‘Autism as a Biomedical Platform for Sex Differences Research’ 9 BioSocieties 262. doi: 10.1057/biosoc.2014.17 Sylvie Goldman (2013) ‘Opinion: Sex, Gender and the Diagnosis of Autism — A Biosocial View of the Male Preponderance’ 7(6) Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 675. doi: 10.1016/j.rasd.2013.02.006 Nancy Bombaci (2012) ‘Popular Discourses on the Neurotypical Woman: Conformity, Authority and Post-War Femininities’ 23(2) Women: A Cultural Review 139, 144. Ryan Yuen et al (2015) ‘Whole-genome Sequencing of Quartet Families with Autism Spectrum Disorder’ 21(2) Nature Medicine 185. doi: 10.1038/nm.3792 MR Herbert et al (2006) ‘Autism and Environmental Genomics’ 27 NeuroToxicology 671. doi: 10.1016/j.neuro.2006.03.017 Neil Risch et al (1999) ‘A Genomic Screen of Autism: Evidence for a Multilocus Etiology’ 65(2) The American Journal of Human Genetics 493. doi: 10.1086/302497 Kyle Anstey (2008) ‘A Critique of Arguments Supporting Disability Avoidance’ 23(2) Disability and Society 235. doi: 10.1080/09687590801954000 Isabel Karpin and Karen O’Connell (2015) ‘Stigmatising the Normal: The Regulation of Behavior as a Disability’ 38(4) University of New South Wales Law Journal 9. Pieter Bonte et al (2014) ‘Is There a Moral Obligation to Conceive Children under the Best Possible Conditions? A Preliminary Framework for Identifying the Preconception Responsibilities of Potential Parents’ 15(5) BMC Medical Ethics 2. Pieter Bonte et al (2014) ‘Is There a Moral Obligation to Conceive Children under the Best Possible Conditions? A Preliminary Framework for Identifying the Preconception Responsibilities of Potential Parents’ 15(5) BMC Medical Ethics 2. Thalia Elev et al (2003) ‘A Longitudinal Behavioral Genetic Analysis of the Etiology of Aggressive and Nonaggressive Antisocial Behavior’ 15(2) Development and Psychopathology 383. Kevin Beaver et al (2008) ‘The Intersection of Genes and Neuropsychological Deficits in the Prediction of Adolescent Delinquency and Low Self-Control’ 54(1) International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 22. doi: 10.1177/0306624X08325349 Essi Viding et al (2005) ‘Evidence for Substantial Genetic Risk for Psychopathy in 7-Year-Olds’ 46(6) Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 592. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00393.x Isabel Karpin and Karen O’Connell (2015) ‘Stigmatising the Normal: The Regulation of Behavior as a Disability’ 38(4) University of New South Wales Law Journal 9. Gary Albrecht and Patrick Devlieger (1999) ‘The Disability Paradox: High Quality of Life Against all Odds’ 48 Social Science and Medicine 977. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00411-0 Sol Levine (1987) ‘The Changing Terrains in Medical Sociology: Emergent Concern with Quality of Life’ 28 Journal of Health and Social Behavior 1. doi: 10.2307/2137136 Louise Keogh and Margaret Otlowski (2013) ‘Life Insurance and Genetic Test Results: A Mutation Carrier's Fight to Achieve Full Cover’ 199(5) The Medical Journal of Australia 363. doi: 10.5694/mja13.10202 Additional information
Funding
This research is supported by Australian Research Council [grant number DP150102935] “The Legal Regulation of Behaviour as a Disability” 2015–18 (with Dr Karen O'Connell).