Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for “Non-Medical” Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making

REFERENCES

• Ahmed, R., D. Kesavayuth, and V. Zikos. 2018. Does being smarter make you happier? Evidence from Europe. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 76:55–67. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2018.06.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberry, M. S., E. S. R. Aziz, S. Ahmed, and S. Abdel-Fattah. 2021. Non invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for common aneuploidies and beyond. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 258:424–9. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.01.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali, A., G. Ambler, A. Strydom, D. Rai, C. Cooper, S. McManus, S. Weich, H. Meltzer, S. Dein, and A. Hassiotis. 2013. The relationship between happiness and intelligent quotient: The contribution of socio-economic and clinical factors. Psychological Medicine 43 (6):1303–12. doi:10.1017/S0033291712002139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, K. J. D., M. L. Bozzay, and E. R. Edenbaum. 2019. Neurocognition and suicide risk in adults. Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports 6 (4):151–65. doi:10.1007/s40473-019-00189-y.
   Google Scholar
• Allyse, M., J. P. Evans, and M. Michie. 2017. Dr. Pangloss’s clinic: Prenatal whole genome sequencing and a return to reality. American Journal of Bioethics17 (1):21–3. doi:10.1080/15265161.2016.1251660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakkeren, I. M., A. Kater‐Kuipers, E. M. Bunnik, A. T. Go, A. Tibben, I. D. de Beaufort, R. J. H. Galjaard, and S. R. Riedijk. 2020. Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the Netherlands: An interview study exploring opinions about and experiences with societal pressure, reimbursement, and an expanding scope. Journal of Genetic Counseling 29 (1):112–21. doi:10.1002/jgc4.1188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, M. W. 2015. Fetal sex determination and gendered prenatal consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture 15 (3):371–90. doi:10.1177/1469540513505606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, R. 2014. There can be no moral obligation to eradicate all disability. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 23 (1):30–40. doi:10.1017/S0963180113000418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berglund, A., M. H. Viuff, A. Skakkebaek, S. Chang, K. Stochholm, and C. H. Gravholt. 2019. Changes in the cohort composition of Turner syndrome and severe non-diagnosis of Klinefelter, 47,XXX and 47,XYY syndrome: A nationwide cohort study. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 14 (1):16. doi:10.1186/s13023-018-0976-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boorse, C. 1977. Health as a theoretical concept. Philosophy of Science 44 (4):542–73. doi:10.1086/288768.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman-Smart, H., J. Savulescu, C. Mand, C. Gyngell, M. D. Pertile, S. Lewis, and M. B. Delatycki. 2019a. ‘Is it better not to know certain things?’: Views of women who have undergone non-invasive prenatal testing on its possible future applications. Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (4):231–8. doi:10.1136/medethics-2018-105167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman-Smart, H., J. Savulescu, C. Mand, C. Gyngell, M. D. Pertile, S. Lewis, and M. B. Delatycki. 2019b. ‘Small cost to pay for peace of mind’: Women’s experiences with non-invasive prenatal testing. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 59 (5):649–55. doi:10.1111/ajo.12945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman‐Smart, H., J. Savulescu, C. Gyngell, C. Mand, and M. B. Delatycki. 2020. Sex selection and non-invasive prenatal testing: A review of current practices, evidence, and ethical issues. Prenatal Diagnosis 40 (4):398–407. doi:10.1002/pd.5555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyle, R. J., and J. Savulescu. 2003. Prenatal diagnosis for “minor” genetic abnormalities is ethical. The American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):60–5. doi:10.1162/152651603322781648.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branca, M. A. 2021. Orchid launches first pre-conception test based on genetic risk scores. ClinicalOMICs. Accessed April 30, 2021. https://www.clinicalomics.com/topics/precision-medicine-topic/polygenic-risk-scores/orchid-launches-first-pre-conception-test-based-on-genetic-risk-scores/
   Google Scholar
• Bredenoord, A. L., M. C. de Vries, and H. van Delden. 2014. The right to an open future concerning genetic information. American Journal of Bioethics14 (3):21–3. doi:10.1080/15265161.2013.879952.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunnik, E. M., W. J. Dondorp, A. L. Bredenoord, G. de Wert, and M. C. Cornel. 2021. Mainstreaming informed consent for genomic sequencing: A call for action. European Journal of Cancer 148:405–10. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2021.02.029.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton-Jeangros, C., S. Cavalli, S. Gouilhers, and R. Hammer. 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):144–61. doi:10.1080/13698575.2013.771737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calvin, C. M., G. D. Batty, G. Der, C. E. Brett, A. Taylor, A. Pattie, I. Čukić, and I. J. Deary. 2017. Childhood intelligence in relation to major causes of death in 68 year follow-up: Prospective population study. BMJ 357: J2708. doi:10.1136/bmj.j2708.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Calvin, C. M., I. J. Deary, C. Fenton, B. A. Roberts, G. Der, N. Leckenby, and G. D. Batty. 2011. Intelligence in youth and all-cause-mortality: Systematic review with meta-analysis. International Journal of Epidemiology 40 (3):626–44. doi:10.1093/ije/dyq190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cernat, A., C. De Freitas, U. Majid, F. Trivedi, C. Higgins, and M. Vanstone. 2019. Facilitating informed choice about non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis of women’s experiences. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 19 (1):27. doi:10.1186/s12884-018-2168-4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cha, C. B., K. M. Wilson, K. M. Tezanos, K. A. DiVasto, and G. K. Tolchin. 2019. Cognition and self-injurious thoughts and behaviors: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. Clinical Psychology Review 69:97–111. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2018.07.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, A. R., and P. A. Benn. 2013. Noninvasive prenatal testing for early sex identification: A few benefits and many concerns. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 56 (4):530–47. doi:10.1353/pbm.2013.0034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, S. C., and D. T. Wasserman. 2017. A framework for unrestricted prenatal whole-genome sequencing: Respecting and enhancing the autonomy of prospective parents. American Journal of Bioethics17 (1):3–18. doi:10.1080/15265161.2016.1251632.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, H., and A. Furnham. 2014. The associations between parental socio-economic conditions, childhood intelligence, adult personality traits, social status and mental well-being. Social Indicators Research 117 (2):653–64. doi:10.1007/s11205-013-0364-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, G. T., E. L. Mortensen, K. Christensen, and M. Osler. 2016. Intelligence in young adulthood and cause-specific mortality in the Danish Conscription Database – A cohort study of 728,160 men. Intelligence 59:64–71. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2016.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiaens, L., L. S. Chitty, and S. Langlois. 2021. Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis: Expanded NIPT that includes conditions other than trisomies 13, 18, and 21 should be offered. Prenatal Diagnosis 41 (10):1316–23. doi:10.1002/pd.5943.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarkeburn, H. 2000. Parental duties and untreatable genetic conditions. Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (5):400–3. doi:10.1136/jme.26.5.400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crabbe, R. E., P. Stone, and S. K. Filoche. 2019. What are women saying about noninvasive prenatal testing? An analysis of online pregnancy discussion forums. Prenatal Diagnosis 39 (10):890–5. doi:10.1002/pd.5500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crouch, D. J. M., and W. F. Bodmer. 2020. Polygenic inheritance, GWAS, polygenic risk scores, and the search for functional variants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 117 (32):18924–33. doi:10.1073/pnas.2005634117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Jong, A., W. J. Dondorp, S. G. M. Frints, C. E. M. De Die-Smulders, and G. M. W. R. De Wert. 2011. Advances in prenatal screening: The ethical dimension. Nature Reviews. Genetics 12 (9):657–63. doi:10.1038/nrg3036.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Jong, A., and G. M. de Wert. 2015. Prenatal screening: An ethical agenda for the near future. Bioethics 29 (1):46–55. doi:10.1111/bioe.12122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deans, Z., A. J. Clarke, and A. J. Newson. 2015. For your interest? The ethical acceptability of using non-invasive prenatal testing to test ‘purely for information’. Bioethics 29 (1):19–25. doi:10.1111/bioe.12125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, C., S. W. Cheung, and H. Liu. 2021. Noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal sex chromosome aneuploidies. Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics 21 (4):405–15. doi:10.1080/14737159.2021.1911651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobrow, M. J., V. Hagens, R. Chafe, T. Sullivan, and L. Rabeneck. 2018. Consolidated principles for screening based on a systematic review and consensus process. Canadian Medical Association Journal 190 (14):E422–9. doi:10.1503/cmaj.171154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dukhovny, S., and M. E. Norton. 2018. What are the goals of prenatal genetic testing? Seminars in Perinatology 42 (5):270–4. doi:10.1053/j.semperi.2018.07.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan, L., H. Shen, B. Gelaye, J. Meijsen, K. Ressler, M. Feldman, R. Peterson, and B. Domingue. 2019. Analysis of polygenic risk score usage and performance in diverse human populations. Nature Communications 10 (1):3328. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-11112-0.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Edwards, S. 2004. Disability, identity and the “expressivist objection”. Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (4):418–20. doi:10.1136/jme.2002.002634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, J. 2012. The relationship between lower intelligence, crime and custodial outcomes: A brief literary review of a vulnerable group. Vulnerable Groups & Inclusion 3 (1):14834. doi:10.3402/vgi.v3i0.14834.
   Google Scholar
• Gadsbøll, K., O. B. Petersen, V. Gatinois, H. Strange, B. Jacobsson, R. Wapner, J. R. Vermeesch, and I. Vogel. 2020. Current use of noninvasive prenatal testing in Europe, Australia and the USA: A graphical presentation. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 99 (6):722–30. doi:10.1111/aogs.13841.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gale, C. R., G. D. Batty, A. M. McIntosh, D. J. Porteous, I. J. Deary, and F. Rasmussen. 2013. Is bipolar disorder more common in highly intelligent people? A cohort study of a million men. Molecular Psychiatry 18 (2):190–4. doi:10.1038/mp.2012.26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gale, C. R., S. L. Hatch, G. D. Batty, and I. J. Deary. 2009. Intelligence in childhood and risk of psychological distress in adulthood: The 1958 National Child Development Survey and the 1970 British Cohort Study. Intelligence 37 (6):592–9. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2008.09.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gammeltoft, T. M., and A. Wahlberg. 2014. Selective reproductive technologies. Annual Review of Anthropology 43 (1):201–16. doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030424.
   Google Scholar
• García, E., D. R. M. Timmermans, and E. van Leeuwen. 2012. Parental duties and prenatal screening: Does an offer of prenatal screening lead women to believe that they are morally compelled to test? Midwifery 28 (6):e837–43. doi:10.1016/j.midw.2011.09.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbon, S., S. Kilshaw, and M. Sleeboom-Faulkner. 2018. Genomics and genetic medicine: Pathways to global health? Anthropology & Medicine 25 (1):1–10. doi:10.1080/13648470.2017.1398816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gil, M. M., V. Accurti, B. Santacruz, M. N. Plana, and K. H. Nicolaides. 2017. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for aneuploidies: Updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology : The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 50 (3):302–14. doi:10.1002/uog.17484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenwood, T. A. 2020. Creativity and bipolar disorder: A shared genetic vulnerability. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 16:239–64. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin, B., S. Edwards, L. S. Chitty, and C. Lewis. 2018. Clinical, social and ethical issues associated with non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology 39 (1):11–8. doi:10.1080/0167482X.2017.1286643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo, J., C. Wu, J. Zhang, X. Qi, S. Lv, S. Jiang, T. Zhou, D. Lu, C. Feng, X. Chang, et al. 2020. Prenatal exposure to mixture of heavy metals, pesticides and phenols and IQ in children at 7 years of age: The SMBCS study. Environment International 139 (105692):105692.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hall, M. C. 2013. Reconciling the disability critique and reproductive liberty: The case of negative genetic selection. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 6 (1):121–43. doi:10.3138/ijfab.6.1.121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanschmidt, F., K. Linde, A. Hilbert, S. G. Riedel‐Heller, and A. Kersting. 2016. Abortion stigma: A systematic review. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 48 (4):169–77. doi:10.1363/48e8516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansson Bittár, N., D. Falkstedt, and A. Sörberg Wallin. 2020. How intelligence and emotional control are related to suicidal behavior across the life course - A register-based study with 38-year follow-up. Psychological Medicine 50 (13):2265–71. doi:10.1017/S0033291719002423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harden, K. P. 2021. “Reports of My Death Were Greatly Exaggerated”: Behavior genetics in the postgenomic era. Annual Review of Psychology 72:37–60. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-052220-103822.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, J. 2005. Reproductive liberty, disease and disability. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 10 (S1):13–6. doi:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)62197-9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hartwig, T. S., C. Borregaard Miltoft, C. I. Malmgren, A. Tabor, and F. S. Jørgensen. 2019. High risk—What’s next? A survey study on decisional conflict, regret, and satisfaction among high‐risk pregnant women making choices about further prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy. Prenatal Diagnosis 39 (8):635–42. doi:10.1002/pd.5476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertig, S. G., S. Cavalli, C. Burton-Jeangros, and B. S. Elger. 2014. ‘Doctor, what would you do in my position?’ Health professionals and the decision-making process in pregnancy monitoring. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (5):310–4. doi:10.1136/medethics-2012-100887.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, M., A. Barrett, M. Choolani, C. Lewis, J. Fisher, and L. S. Chitty. 2017. Has noninvasive prenatal testing impacted termination of pregnancy and live birth rates of infants with Down syndrome? Prenatal Diagnosis 37 (13):1281–90. doi:10.1002/pd.5182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmann, B. 2017. ‘You are inferior!’ Revisiting the expressivist argument. Bioethics 31 (7):505–14. doi:10.1111/bioe.12365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, J. Y., and J. A. Labrecque. 2019. From GWAS to PheWAS: The search for causality in big data. The Lancet. Digital Health 1 (3):e101–3. doi:10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30059-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hui, L., J. Barclay, A. Poulton, B. Hutchinson, and J. L. Halliday. 2018. Prenatal diagnosis and socioeconomic status in the non-invasive prenatal testing era: A population-based study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 58 (4):404–10. doi:10.1111/ajo.12778.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung, G. C.-L., S. A. Pietras, H. Carliner, L. Martin, L. J. Seidman, S. L. Buka, and S. E. Gilman. 2016. Cognitive ability in childhood and the chronicity and suicidality of depression. British Journal of Psychiatry 208 (2):120–7. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.114.158782.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob, L., J. M. Haro, and A. Koyanagi. 2019. Association between intelligence quotient and violence perpetration in the English general population. Psychological Medicine 49 (8):1316–23. doi:10.1017/S0033291718001939.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob, L., L. Smith, P. Thoumie, J. M. Haro, A. Stickley, and A. Koyanagi. 2020. Association between intelligence quotient and disability: The role of socioeconomic status. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 63 (4):296–301. doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2019.07.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janiak, E., I. Kawachi, A. Goldberg, and B. Gottlieb. 2014. Abortion barriers and perceptions of gestational age among women seeking abortion care in the latter half of the second trimester. Contraception 89 (4):322–7. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2013.11.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssens, A. C. J. W. 2019. Validity of polygenic risk scores: Are we measuring what we think we are? Human Molecular Genetics 28 (R2):R143–50. doi:10.1093/hmg/ddz205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeon, K. C., L.-S. Chen, and P. Goodson. 2012. Decision to abort after a prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosome abnormality: A systematic review of the literature. Genetics in Medicine 14 (1):27–38. doi:10.1038/gim.0b013e31822e57a7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeppesen, L. D., L. Hatt, R. Singh, K. Ravn, M. Kølvraa, P. Schelde, N. Uldbjerg, I. Vogel, and D. L. Lildballe. 2021. Cell-based non-invasive prenatal diagnosis in a pregnancy at risk of cystic fibrosis. Prenatal Diagnosis 41 (2):234–40. doi:10.1002/pd.5861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jønch, A. E., E. Douard, C. Moreau, A. Van Dijck, M. Passeggeri, F. Kooy, J. Puechberty, C. Campbell, D. Sanlaville, H. Lefroy, et al. 2019. Estimating the effect size of the 15Q11.2 BP1-BP2 deletion and its contribution to neurodevelopmental symptoms: Recommendations for practice. Journal of Medical Genetics 56 (10):701–10. doi:10.1136/jmedgenet-2018-105879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koenen, K. C., T. E. Moffitt, A. L. Roberts, L. T. Martin, L. Kubzansky, H. Harrington, R. Poulton, and A. Caspi. 2009. Childhood IQ and adult mental disorders: A test of the cognitive reserve hypothesis. The American Journal of Psychiatry 166 (1):50–7. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08030343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohler, J. N., E. Turbitt, and B. B. Biesecker. 2017. Personal utility in genomic testing: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Human Genetics 25 (6):662–8. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2017.10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostenko, E., F. Chantraine, K. Vandeweyer, M. Schmid, A. Lefevre, D. Hertz, L. Zelle, J. L. Bartha, and G. C. Di Renzo. 2019. Clinical and economic impact of adopting noninvasive prenatal testing as a primary screening method for fetal aneuploidies in the general pregnancy population. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy 45 (6):413–23. doi:10.1159/000491750.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucharik, M., A. Gnip, M. Hyblova, J. Budis, L. Strieskova, M. Harsanyova, O. Pös, Z. Kubiritova, J. Radvanszky, G. Minarik, et al. 2020. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) by low coverage genomic sequencing: Detection limits of screened chromosomal microdeletions. PLoS One 15 (8):e0238245. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0238245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labonté, V., D. Alsaid, B. Lang, and J. J. Meerpohl. 2019. Psychological and social consequences of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): A scoping review. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 19 (1):1–14. doi:10.1186/s12884-019-2518-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leu, C., T. G. Richardson, T. Kaufmann, D. van der Meer, O. A. Andreassen, L. T. Westlye, R. M. Busch, G. D. Smith, and D. Lal. 2020. Pleiotropy of polygenic factors associated with focal and generalized epilepsy in the general population. PLoS One 15 (4):e0232292. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, A. C. F., and R. C. Green. 2021. Polygenic risk scores in the clinic: New perspectives needed on familiar ethical issues. Genome Medicine 13 (1):14. doi:10.1186/s13073-021-00829-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, C., C. Silcock, and L. S. Chitty. 2013. Non-invasive prenatal testing for Down’s syndrome: Pregnant women’s views and likely uptake. Public Health Genomics 16 (5):223–32. doi:10.1159/000353523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo, T. K., K. Y. K. Chan, A. S. Y. Kan, P. L. So, C. W. Kong, S. L. Mak, and C. N. Lee. 2019. Decision outcomes in women offered noninvasive prenatal test (NIPT) for positive down screening results. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 32 (2):348–50. doi:10.1080/14767058.2017.1378323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lou, S., L. Mikkelsen, L. Hvidman, O. B. Petersen, and C. P. Nielsen. 2015. Does screening for Down’s syndrome cause anxiety in pregnant women? A systematic review. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 94 (1):15–27. doi:10.1111/aogs.12482.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lou, S., K. Carstensen, O. B. Petersen, C. P. Nielsen, C. P. L. Hvidman, M. R. Lanther, and I. Vogel. 2018. Termination of pregnancy following a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: A qualitative study of the decision-making process of pregnant couples. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 97 (10):1228–36. doi:10.1111/aogs.13386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacCabe, J. H., M. P. Lambe, S. Cnattingius, P. C. Sham, A. S. David, A. Reichenberg, R. M. Murray, and C. M. Hultman. 2010. Excellent school performance at age 16 and risk of adult bipolar disorder: National cohort study. The British Journal of Psychiatry 196 (2):109–15. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.108.060368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, A. R., M. Kanai, Y. Kamatani, Y. Okada, B. M. Neale, and M. J. Daly. 2019. Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacerbate health disparities. Nature Genetics 51 (4):584–91. doi:10.1038/s41588-019-0379-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauron, A. 2015. Choosing among possible persons: The ethics of prenatal selection in the postgenomic age. Comptes Rendus Biologies 338 (8–9): 566–70.
   Google Scholar
• McLennan, A., R. Palma-Dias, F. da Silva Costa, S. Meagher, D. L. Nisbet, and F. Scott. 2016. Noninvasive prenatal testing in routine clinical practice – An audit of NIPT and combined first-trimester screening in an unselected Australian population. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 56 (1):22–8. doi:10.1111/ajo.12432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Migliorini, S., G. Saccone, F. Silvestro, G. Massaro, B. Arduino, P. D’Alessandro, M. T. Petti, J. A. C. Paino, M. Guida, M. Locci, et al. 2020. First-trimester screening based on cell-free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women’s experience. Prenatal Diagnosis 40 (11):1482–8. doi:10.1002/pd.5800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millum, J. 2014. The foundation of the child’s right to an open future. Journal of Social Philosophy 45 (4):522–38. doi:10.1111/josp.12076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozersky, J. 2015. Hoping someday never comes: Deferring ethical thinking about noninvasive prenatal testing. The American Journal of Bioethics Empirical Bioethics 6 (1):31–41. doi:10.1080/23294515.2014.993097.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Muller, C., and L. D. Cameron. 2014. Trait anxiety, information modality, and responses to communications about prenatal genetic testing. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 37 (5):988–99. doi:10.1007/s10865-014-9555-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munday, S., and J. Savulescu. 2021. Three models for the regulation of polygenic scores in reproduction. Journal of Medical Ethics. Online First: 18 January 2021. doi:10.1136/medethics-2020-106588.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Otter, M., C. T. R. M. Schrander-Stumpel, and L. M. G. Curfs. 2010. Triple X syndrome: A review of the literature. European Journal of Human Genetics 18 (3):265–71. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2009.109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pignatiello, G. A., R. J. Martin, and R. L. Hickman, Jr. 2020. Decision fatigue: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Health Psychology 25 (1):123–35. doi:10.1177/1359105318763510.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Printzlau, F., J. Wolstencroft, and D. H. Skuse. 2017. Cognitive, behavioral, and neural consequences of sex chromosome aneuploidy. Journal of Neuroscience Research 95 (1–2):311–9. doi:10.1002/jnr.23951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Power, R. A., S. Steinberg, G. Bjornsdottir, C. A. Rietveld, A. Abdellaoui, M. M. Nivard, M. Johannesson, T. E. Galesloot, J. J. Hottenga, G. Willemsen, et al. 2015. Polygenic risk scores for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder predict creativity. Nature Neuroscience 18 (7):953–5. doi:10.1038/nn.4040.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Public Health England. 2021. Guidance - Screening for Down’s syndrome, Edwards’ syndrome and Patau’s syndrome: NIPT. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/screening-for-downs-syndrome-edwards-syndrome-and-pataus-syndrome-non-invasive-prenatal-testing-nipt/screening-for-downs-syndrome-edwards-syndrome-and-pataus-syndrome-nipt (accessed 29 August 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Ramdaney, A., J. Hoskovec, J. Harkenrider, E. Soto, and L. Murphy. 2018. Clinical experience with sex chromosome aneuploidies detected by noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT): Accuracy and patient decision-making. Prenatal Diagnosis 38 (11):841–8. doi:10.1002/pd.5339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravitsky, V., F. Rousseau, and A.-M. Laberge. 2017. Providing unrestricted access to prenatal testing does not translate to enhanced autonomy. American Journal of Bioethics 17 (1):39–41. doi:10.1080/15265161.2016.1251651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regalado, A. 2019. The world’s first Gattaca baby tests are finally here. Accessed April 30, 2021. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/11/08/132018/polygenic-score-ivf-embryo-dna-tests-genomic-prediction-gattaca/
   Google Scholar
• Rehmann-Sutter, C., and C. Schües. 2020. Die NIPT-Entscheidung des G-BA. Eine ethische Analyse. Ethik in Der Medizin 32 (4):385–403. doi:10.1007/s00481-020-00592-0.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. 2017. Resisting paternalism in prenatal whole-genome sequencing. American Journal of Bioethics17 (1):35–7. doi:10.1080/15265161.2016.1251662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riggan, K. A., S. Close, and M. A. Allyse. 2020. Family experiences and attitudes about receiving the diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidy in a child. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics 184 (2):404–13. doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.31781.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robson, S. J., and L. Hui. 2015. National decline in invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures in association with uptake of combined first trimester and cell-free DNA aneuploidy screening. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 55 (5):507–10. doi:10.1111/ajo.12380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothman, B. K. 1985. The products of conception: The social context of reproductive choices. Journal of Medical Ethics 11 (4):188–95. doi:10.1136/jme.11.4.188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandel, M. J. 2007. The case against perfection: Ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Savulescu, J. 2001. Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. Bioethics 15 (5–6):413–26. doi:10.1111/1467-8519.00251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savulescu, J. 2007. In defence of procreative beneficence. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (5):284–8. doi:10.1136/jme.2006.018184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz, P. H. 2014. Reframing the disease debate and defending the biostatistical theory. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 39 (6):572–89. doi:10.1093/jmp/jhu039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shipp, T. D., D. Z. Shipp, B. Bromley, R. Sheahan, A. Cohen, E. Lieberman, and B. Benacerraf. 2004. What factors are associated with parents’ desire to know the sex of their unborn child? Birth 31 (4):272–9. doi:10.1111/j.0730-7659.2004.00319.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skrzypek, H., and L. Hui. 2017. Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy and single gene disorders. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 42:26–38. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2017.02.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sörberg, A., P. Allebeck, B. Melin, D. Gunnell, and T. Hemmingsson. 2013. Cognitive ability in early adulthood is associated with later suicide and suicide attempt: The role of risk factors over the life course. Psychological Medicine 43 (1):49–60. doi:10.1017/S0033291712001043.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sørensen, H. J., D. Sæbye, A. Urfer-Parnas, E. L. Mortensen, and J. Parnas. 2012. Premorbid intelligence and educational level in bipolar and unipolar disorders: A Danish draft board study. Journal of Affective Disorders 136 (3):1188–91. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2011.12.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparrow, R. 2007. Procreative beneficence, obligation, and eugenics. Genomics, Society and Policy 3 (3):43–59. doi:10.1186/1746-5354-3-3-43.
   Google Scholar
• Srebniak, M. I., M. F. C. M. Knapen, L. C. P. Govaerts, M. Polak, M. Joosten, K. E. M. Diderich, L. J. C. M. van Zutven, K. A. K. E. Prinsen, S. Riedijk, A. T. J. I. Go, et al. 2020. Social and medical need for whole genome high resolution NIPT. Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine 8 (1):e1062. doi:10.1002/mgg3.1062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stapleton, G. 2017. Qualifying choice: Ethical reflection on the scope of prenatal screening. Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy 20 (2):195–205. doi:10.1007/s11019-016-9725-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinberg, J. R., J. M. Tschann, D. Furgerson, and C. C. Harper. 2016. Psychosocial factors and pre-abortion psychological health: The significance of stigma. Social Science & Medicine 150:67–75. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suzumori, N., A. Sekizawa, E. Takeda, O. Samura, A. Sasaki, R. Akaishi, S. Wada, H. Hamanoue, F. Hirahara, H. Sawai, et al. 2021. Retrospective details of false-positive and false-negative results in non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 256:75–81. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.10.050.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takeda, E., N. Suzumori, T. Ebara, J. Yotsumoto, K. Kumagai, K. Oseto, H. Numabe, and M. Sugiura‐Ogasawara. 2018. Psychological distress in post-partum women after non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in Japan. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 44 (1):35–42. doi:10.1111/jog.13483.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, G. M., and B. K. Rothman. 2016. Keeping the backdoor to eugenics ajar?: Disability and the future of prenatal screening. AMA Journal of Ethics 18 (4):406–15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thomas, J., J. Harraway, and D. Kirchhoffer. 2021. Non-invasive prenatal testing: Clinical utility and ethical concerns about recent advances. The Medical Journal of Australia 214 (4):168–70. doi:10.5694/mja2.50928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treff, N. R., D. Marin, L. Lello, S. Hsu, and L. C. Tellier. 2020. Preimplantation genetic TESTING: Preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disease risk. Reproduction 160 (5):A13–7. doi:10.1530/REP-20-0071.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turkheimer, E. 2015. Genetic prediction. The Hastings Center Report 45 (5):S32–8. doi:10.1002/hast.496.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Den Bogaert, K., L. Lannoo, N. Brison, V. Gatinois, M. Baetens, B. Blaumeiser, F. Boemer, L. Bourlard, V. Bours, A. De Leener, et al. 2021. Outcome of publicly funded nationwide first-tier noninvasive prenatal screening. Genetics in Medicine 23 (6):1137–42. doi:10.1038/s41436-021-01101-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijke, I., L. Bosch, A. L. Bredenoord, M. Cornel, S. Repping, and S. Hendriks. 2018. The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: A systematic review of reasons. Human Reproduction 33 (9):1777–96. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijke, I., P. Lakeman, I. B. Mathijssen, M. Goddijn, M. C. Cornel, and L. Henneman. 2021. How will new genetic technologies, such as gene editing, change reproductive decision-making? Views of high-risk couples. European Journal of Human Genetics 29 (1):39–50. doi:10.1038/s41431-020-00706-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Elslande, J., N. Brison, J. R. Vermeesch, K. Devriendt, K. Van Den Bogaert, E. Legius, M. Van Ranst, P. Vermeersch, and J. Billen. 2019. The sudden death of the combined first trimester aneuploidy screening, a single centre experience in Belgium. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine 57 (11):e294–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Schendel, R. V., G. C. M. L. Page-Christiaens, L. Beulen, C. M. Bilardo, M. A. de Boer, A. B. C. Coumans, B. H. W. Faas, I. M. van Langen, K. D. Lichtenbelt, M. C. van Maarle, et al. 2017. Women’s experience with non-invasive prenatal testing and emotional well-being and satisfaction after test-results. Journal of Genetic Counseling 26 (6):1348–56. doi:10.1007/s10897-017-0118-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vestergaard, E. M., R. Singh, P. Schelde, L. Hatt, K. Ravn, R. Christensen, D. L. Lildballe, O. B. Petersen, N. Uldbjerg, and I. Vogel. 2017. On the road to replacing invasive testing with cell-based NIPT: Five clinical cases with aneuploidies, microduplication, unbalanced structural rearrangement, or mosaicism. Prenatal Diagnosis 37 (11):1120–4. doi:10.1002/pd.5150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wätterbjörk, I., K. Blomberg, K. Nilsson, and E. Sahlberg‐Blom. 2015. Decision-making process of prenatal screening described by pregnant women and their partners. Health Expectations 18 (5):1582–92. doi:10.1111/hex.12147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigby, K., C. D’Epagnier, S. Howell, A. Reicks, R. Wilson, L. Cordeiro, and N. Tartaglia. 2016. Expanding the phenotype of Triple X syndrome: A comparison of prenatal versus postnatal diagnosis. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A 170 (11):2870–81. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.37688.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, S. 2005. Designer babies’, instrumentalisation and the child’s right to an open future. In Philosophical reflections on medical ethics, 44–69. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, J. M. G., and G. Jungner. 1968. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Public Health Papers 34:9–124.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. 2020. Screening programmes: a short guide. Increase effectiveness, maximize benefits and minimize harm. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/330829/9789289054782-eng.pdf (accessed 10 September 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Wrulich, M., M. Brunner, G. Stadler, D. Schalke, U. Keller, M. Chmiel, and R. Martin. 2013. Childhood intelligence and adult health: The mediating roles of education and socioeconomic status. Intelligence 41 (5):490–500. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2013.06.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wyatt, J. 2001. Medical paternalism and the fetus. Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (2):ii15–20. doi:10.1136/jme.27.suppl_2.ii15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Xu, Y., L. Chen, Y. Liu, Y. Hao, Z. Xu, L. Deng, and J. Xie. 2019. Screening, prenatal diagnosis, and prenatal decision for sex chromosome aneuploidy. Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics 19 (6):537–42. doi:10.1080/14737159.2019.1613154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanes, T., A. M. McInerney-Leo, M. H. Law, and S. Cummings. 2020. The emerging field of polygenic risk scores and perspective for use in clinical care. Human Molecular Genetics 29 (R2):R165–76. doi:10.1093/hmg/ddaa136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaron, Y. 2016. The implications of non-invasive prenatal testing failures: A review of an under-discussed phenomenon. Prenatal Diagnosis 36 (5):391–6. doi:10.1002/pd.4804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheutlin, A. B., J. Dennis, R. Karlsson Linnér, A. Moscati, N. Restrepo, P. Straub, D. Ruderfer, V. M. Castro, C.-Y. Chen, T. Ge, et al. 2019. Penetrance and pleiotropy of polygenic risk scores for schizophrenia in 106,160 patients across four health care systems. The American Journal of Psychiatry 176 (10):846–55. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.18091085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zolkefli, Y. 2017. Evaluating the concept of choice in healthcare. The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences 24 (6):92–6. doi:10.21315/mjms2017.24.6.11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar