‘I don’t want to see my children suffer after birth’: the ‘risk of knowing’ talk and decision-making in prenatal screening for Down’s syndrome in Hong Kong

References

• Antaki, C., 1988. Analysing everyday explanation: a casebook of methods. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Arribas-Ayllon, M., Sarangi, S., and Clarke, A., 2008a. Managing self-responsibility through other-oriented blame: family accounts of genetic testing. Social science and medicine, 66, 1521–1532. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.12.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arribas-Ayllon, M., Sarangi, S., and Clarke, A., 2008b. The micropolitics of responsibility vis-à-vis autonomy: parental accounts of childhood genetic testing and (non)disclosure. Sociology of health and illness, 30 (2), 255–271. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01037.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arribas-Ayllon, M., Sarangi, S., and Clarke, A., 2009. Professional ambivalence: accounts of ethical practice in childhood genetic testing. Journal of genetic counseling, 18, 173–184. doi:10.1007/s10897-008-9201-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arribas-Ayllon, M., Sarangi, S., and Clarke, A., 2011. Genetic testing: accounts of autonomy, responsibility and blame. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Beckwith, A. and Crichton, J., 2010. The negotiation of the problem statement in cognitive behavioural therapy. Communication and medicine, 7 (1), 23–32. doi:10.1558/cam.v7i1.23
   Google Scholar
• Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C., 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burton-Jeangros, C., et al., 2013. Between tolerable uncertainty and unacceptable risks: how health professionals and pregnant women think about the probabilities generated by prenatal screening. Health, risk & society, 15 (2), 144–161. doi:10.1080/13698575.2013.771737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buttny, R., 1993. Social accountability in communication. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, H.Y., et al., 2009. Trend of prenatal invasive testing and Down’s syndrome screening in a tertiary referral centre in Hong Kong. Hong Kong journal of gynaecology, obstetrics and midwifery, 9 (1), 22–27.
   Google Scholar
• Chiang, H.H., Chao, Y.M., and Yuh, Y.S., 2006. Informed choice of pregnant women in prenatal screening tests for Down’s syndrome. Journal of medical ethics, 32, 273–277. doi:10.1136/jme.2005.012385
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, A., Sarangi, S., and Verrier-Jones, K., 2011. Voicing the lifeworld: parental accounts of responsibility in genetic consultations for polycystic kidney disease. Social science and medicine, 72, 1743–1751. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.06.040
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, M., 1986. Risk acceptability according to the social sciences. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Etchegary, H. and Perrier, C., 2007. Information processing in the context of genetic risk: implications for genetic-risk communication. Journal of genetic counseling, 16 (4), 419–432. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9082-z
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glenn, P.G., 2003. Laughter in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henneman, L., Marteau, T.M., and Timmermans, D.R.M., 2008. Clinical geneticists’ and genetic counselors’ views on the communication of genetic risks: a qualitative study. Patient education and counseling, 73 (1), 42–49. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.05.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyman, B., et al., 2006. On being at higher risk: a qualitative study of prenatal screening for chromosomal anomalies. Social science and medicine, 62 (10), 2360–2372. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.10.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, C.P., Leung, K.Y., and Tang, M.H.Y., 2009. Prenatal screening for foetal Down’s syndrome. Hong Kong medical diary, 14 (3), 4–6.
   Google Scholar
• Linell, P., et al., 2002. Expert talk in medical contexts: explicit and implicit orientation to risks. Research on language and social interaction, 35 (2), 195–218. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3502_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magnusson, M.B., Hulthén, J., and Kjellgren, K.I., 2009. Misunderstanding in multilingual counseling settings involving school nurses and obese/overweight pupils. Communication and medicine, 6 (2), 153–164.
   Google Scholar
• Markens, S., Browner, C.H., and Press, N., 1999. ‘Because of the risks’: how US pregnant women account for refusing prenatal screening. Social science and medicine, 49 (3), 359–369. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00097-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marteau, T.M., Dormandy, E., and Michie, S., 2001. A measure of informed choice. Health expectations, 4 (2), 99–108. doi:10.1046/j.1369-6513.2001.00140.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Michie, S., Dormandy, E., and Marteau, T.M., 2003. Informed choice: understanding knowledge in the context of screening uptake. Patient education and counseling, 50 (3), 247–253. doi:10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00044-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peräkylä, A., 1995. AIDS counseling: institutional interaction and clinical practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pilnick, A., 2002. ‘There are no rights and wrongs in these situations’: identifying interactional difficulties in genetic counselling. Sociology of health and illness, 24 (1), 66–88. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.00004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilnick, A., 2004. It’s just one of the best tests that we’ve got at the moment’: the presentation of nuchal translucency screening for fetal abnormality in pregnancy. Discourse and society, 15 (4), 451–465. doi:10.1177/0957926504043710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilnick, A., 2008. ‘It’s something for you both to think about’: choice and decision-making in nuchal translucency screening for Down’s syndrome. Sociology of health and illness, 30 (4), 511–530. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01071.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilnick, A. and Zayts, O.A., 2012. ‘Let’s have it tested first’: choice and circumstances in decision-making following positive antenatal screening in Hong Kong. Sociology of health and illness, 34 (2), 266–282. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2011.01425.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilnick, A. and Zayts, O.A., 2014. ‘It’s just a likelihood’: uncertainty as topic and resource in conveying ‘positive’ results in an antenatal screening clinic. Symbolic interaction. doi:10.1002/symb.99
   Google Scholar
• Press, N. and Browner, C.H., 1997. Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis. Social science and medicine, 45 (7), 979–989. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(97)00011-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapp, R., 1999. Testing women, testing the fetus: the social impact of amniocentesis in America. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Reid, B., et al., 2009. A meta-synthesis of pregnant women’s decision-making processes with regard to antenatal screening for Down syndrome. Social science and medicine, 69 (11), 1561–15. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reminnick, L., 2006. The quest for the perfect baby: why do Israeli women seek prenatal genetic testing? Sociology, 28 (1), 21–53.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, C. and Sarangi, S., 2005. Theme-oriented discourse analysis of medical encounters. Medical education, 39 (6), 632–640. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02171.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothman, B.K., 1988. The tentative pregnancy: prenatal diagnosis and the future of motherhood. London: Pandora.
   Google Scholar
• Sarangi, S., et al., 2003. ‘Relatively speaking’: relativisation of genetic risk in counselling for predictive testing. Health, risk & society, 5 (2), 155–170. doi:10.1080/1369857031000123939
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarangi, S., et al., 2004. Initiation of reflective frames in counseling for Huntington’s disease predictive testing. Journal of genetic counseling, 13 (2), 135–155. doi:10.1023/B:JOGC.0000018823.60761.e0
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sarangi, S., et al., 2005. (Mis)alignments in counseling for Huntington’s disease predictive testing: clients? Responses to reflective frames. Journal of genetic counseling, 14 (1), 29–42. doi:10.1007/s10897-005-1498-3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sarangi, S. and Clarke, A., 2002. Constructing an account by contrast in counselling for childhood genetic testing. Social science and medicine, 54 (2), 295–308. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00029-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, M.B. and Lyman, S.M., 1968. Accounts. American sociological review, 33 (1), 46–62. doi:10.2307/2092239
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seale, C., et al., 2007. Negotiating frame ambiguity: a study of simulated encounters in medical education. Communication and medicine, 4 (2), 177–187. doi:10.1515/CAM.2007.021
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zayts, O. and Kang, M.A., 2010. Information delivery in prenatal genetic counseling: on the role of initial inquiries. Journal of Asian Pacific communication, 20 (2), 243–259. doi:10.1075/japc.20.2.05zay
   Google Scholar
• Zayts, O. and Schnurr, S., 2011. Laughter as medical providers’ resource: negotiating informed choice in prenatal genetic counseling. Research on language and social interaction, 44 (1), 1–20. doi:10.1080/08351813.2011.544221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zayts, O. and Schnurr, S., 2012. ‘You may know better than I do’: negotiating advice-giving on Down’s syndrome screening in a Hong Kong prenatal hospital. In: H. Limberg and M.A. Locher, eds. Advice in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 195–212.
   Google Scholar
• Zayts, O.A., Wake, V.Y., and Schnurr, S., 2012. Chinese prenatal genetic counseling discourse in Hong Kong: healthcare providers’ (non)directive stance, or who is making the decision? In: Y. Pan and D.Z. Kádár, eds. Chinese discourse and interaction: theory and practice. London: Equinox, 228–247.
   Google Scholar