Top

Published in:

01-04-2006 | Original Paper

The Relationship of Nondirectiveness to Genetic Counseling: Report of a Workshop at the 2003 NSGC Annual Education Conference

Authors: Jon Weil, Kelly Ormond, June Peters, Kathryn Peters, Barbara Bowles Biesecker, Bonnie LeRoy

Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Issue 2/2006

Abstract

Nondirectiveness has been a guiding principle for genetic counseling since the founding of the profession. However, its efficacy and appropriateness in this role have been frequently questioned. A workshop at the 2003 Annual Education Conference of the National Society of Genetic Counselors provided audience participation in a discussion of these issues. Participants presented arguments for and against nondirectiveness as a central ethos. They described complex personal transitions in adapting what they had learned about nondirectiveness during training to the realities of the workplace. There was support for flexible approaches to genetic counseling, with varying adherence to nondirectiveness, based on client and family needs and values, clinical circumstances, and desired counseling outcomes. The discussion supports the use of clinical experience, outcomes research, and the experience of other professions to move beyond nondirectiveness and more accurately identify the theoretical bases that underlie genetic counseling in the variety of circumstances in which it is currently practiced.

Bartels, D. M., LeRoy, B. S., McCarthy, P., & Caplan, A. L. (1997). Nondirectiveness in genetic counseling: A survey of practitioners. Am J Med Genet, 72, 172–179.CrossRefPubMed

Biesecker, B., & Peters, K. (2001). Process studies in genetic counseling: Peering into the black box. Am J Med Genet, 106, 191–198.CrossRefPubMed

Biesecker, B. B. (2000). Reproduction, ethics, the ethics of reproductive genetic counseling: Nondirectiveness. In T. J. Murray & M. J. Mehlman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of ethical, legal, and policy issues in biotechnology (pp. 977–983). New York: Wiley.

Bower, M. A., McCarthy Veach, P., Bartels, D. M., & LeRoy, B. S. (2002). A survey of genetic counselors’ strategies for addressing ethical and professional challenges in practice. J Genet Counsel, 11, 163–186.CrossRef

Brunger, F., & Lippman, A. (1995). Resistance and adherence to the norms of genetic counseling. J Genet Counsel, 4, 151–168.CrossRef

Burke, B. M., & Kolker, A. (1994a). Directiveness in prenatal genetic counseling. Women Health, 22, 31–53.PubMed

Burke, B. M., & Kolker, A. (1994b). Variation in content in prenatal genetic counseling interviews. J Genet Counsel, 3, 23–38.CrossRef

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

Clarke, A. J. (1997). The process of genetic counseling: Beyond non-directiveness. In P. S. Harper & A. J. Clarke (Eds.), Genetics, society and clinical practice (pp. 179–200). Oxford: BIOS Scientific.

Cranney, A., O'Connor, A. M., Jacobsen, M. J., Tugwell, P., Adachi, J. D., Ooi, D. S., et al. (2002). Development and pilot testing of a decision aid for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Patient Educ Couns, 47, 245–255.CrossRefPubMed

Djurdjinovic, L. (1998). Psychosocial counseling. In D. L. Baker, J. L. Schuette, & W. R. Uhlmann (Eds.), A guide to genetic counseling (pp. 127–166). New York: Wiley.

Elwyn, G., Gray, J., & Clarke, A. (2000). Shared decision making and non-directiveness in genetic counselling. J Med Genet, 37, 135–138.CrossRefPubMed

Engel, G. L. (1997). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196, 129–136.CrossRef

Eunpu, D. L. (1997). Systemically-based psychotherapeutic techniques in genetic counseling. J Genet Counsel, 6, 1–20.CrossRef

Fine, B. A. (1993). The evolution of nondirectiveness in genetic counseling and implications of the human genome project. In D. M. Bartels, B. S. LeRoy, & A. L. Caplan (Eds.), Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling (pp. 101–117). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Frankel, R. M., Quill, T. E., & McDaniel, S. H. (Eds.) (2003). The biopsychosocial approach: Past, present, future. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Green, M. J., Peterson, S. K., Baker, M. W., Harper, G. R., Friedman, L. C., Rubinstein, W. S., et al. (2004). Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 292, 442–452.CrossRefPubMed

Hamann, J., Leucht, S., & Kissling, W. (2003). Shared decision-making in psychiatry. Acta Psychiatr Scand, 107, 403–409.

Kessler, S. (1979). The counselor–counselee relationship. In S. Kessler (Ed.), Genetic counseling: Psychological dimensions (pp. 53–63). New York: Academic Press.

Kessler, S. (1992). Psychological aspects of genetic counseling. VII: Thoughts on directiveness. J Genet Counsel, 1, 9–18.CrossRef

Kessler, S. (1997). Psychological aspects of genetic counseling. XI: Nondirectiveness revisited. Am J Med Genet, 72, 164–171.CrossRefPubMed

Kessler, S. (1998). Psychological aspects of genetic counseling. XII: More on counseling skills. J Genet Counsel, 7, 263–278.CrossRef

Kessler, S. (1999). Psychological aspects of genetic counseling. XIII: Empathy and decency. J Genet Counsel, 8, 333–343.CrossRef

Laine, C., & Davidoff, F. (1996). Patient-centered medicine: A professional evolution. JAMA, 275, 152–156.CrossRefPubMed

Légaré, F., O'Connor, A. M., Graham, I. D., Wells, G. A., Jacobsen, M. A., Elmslie, T., et al.(2003). The effect of decision aids on the agreement between women's and physicians’ decisional conflict about hormone replacement therapy. Patient Educ Couns, 50, 211–221.CrossRefPubMed

McCarthy Veach, P., Bartels, D. M., & LeRoy, B. S. (2002). Commentary on genetic counseling—A profession in search of itself. J Genet Counsel, 11, 187–191.CrossRef

McCarthy Veach, P., LeRoy, B. S., & Bartels, D. M. (2003). Facilitating the genetic counseling process: A manual for practice. New York: Springer-Verlag.

McDaniel, S. H., Hepworth, J., & Doherty, W. J. (1992). Medical family therapy. New York: Basic Books.

Miller, W. R. (2004). Motivational interviewing in service to health promotion. Am J Health Promot, 18(3), A1–A10.

Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational interviewing: Preparing people for change (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

National Society of Genetic Counselors (1992). Code of ethics. J Genet Counsel, 1, 1–43.

Pew Health Professions Commission (1994). Health professions education and relationship-centered care: Report of the Pew–Fetzer Task Force. San Francisco: UCSF Center for the Health Professions.

Sorenson, J. R. (1993). Genetic counseling: Values that have mattered. In D. M. Bartels, B. S. LeRoy, & A. L. Caplan (Eds.), Prescribing our future: Ethical challenges in genetic counseling (pp. 3–14). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Sorenson, J. R., Lakon, C., Spinney, T., & Jennings-Grant, T. (2004). Assessment of a decision aid to assist genetic testing research participants in the informed consent process. Genet Test, 8, 336–346.CrossRefPubMed

Trepanier, A., Ahrens, M., McKinnen, W., Peters, J., Stopfer, J., Grumet, S. C., et al. (2004). Genetic cancer risk assessment and counseling: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Counsel, 13, 83–114.CrossRef

van Roosmalen, M. S., Stalmeier, P. F. M., Verhoef, L. C. G., Hoekstra-Weebers, J. E. H. M., Oosterwijk, J. C., Hoogerbrugge, N., et al. (2004). Randomized trial of a shared decision-making intervention consisting of trade-offs and individualized treatment information for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol, 22, 3293–3301.CrossRefPubMed

Weil, J. (2000). Psychosocial genetic counseling. New York: Oxford University Press.

Weil, J. (2003). Psychosocial genetic counseling in the post-nondirective era: A point of view. J Genet Counsel, 12, 199–211.CrossRef

Whelan, T., Levine, M., Willan, A., Gafni, A., Sanders, K., Mirsky, D., et al. (2004). Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: A randomized trial. JAMA, 292, 435–441.CrossRefPubMed

White, M. T. (1997). “Respect for autonomy” in genetic counseling: An analysis and a proposal. J Genet Counsel, 6, 297–313.CrossRef

Wolff, G., & Jung, C. (1995). Nondirectiveness and genetic counseling. J Genet Counsel, 4, 3–26.CrossRef

Title: The Relationship of Nondirectiveness to Genetic Counseling: Report of a Workshop at the 2003 NSGC Annual Education Conference
Authors: Jon Weil
Kelly Ormond
June Peters
Kathryn Peters
Barbara Bowles Biesecker
Bonnie LeRoy
Publication date: 01-04-2006
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Issue 2/2006
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-005-9008-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The Relationship of Nondirectiveness to Genetic Counseling: Report of a Workshop at the 2003 NSGC Annual Education Conference

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2006

A New Definition of Genetic Counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Task Force Report

A Qualitative Study of Health Professionals' Views Regarding Provision of Information About Health-Protective Behaviors During Genetic Consultation for Breast Cancer

2005 National Society of Genetic Counselors Presidential Address: Raising Our Voice

Twin Gestation Pregnancies: Genetic Counseling and Testing Experience

On Using a Cancer Center Cancer Registry to Identify Newly Affected Women Eligible for Hereditary Breast Cancer Syndrome Testing: Practical Considerations

National Society of Genetic Counselors, 25th Annual Education Conference