IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v60y2005i4p823-832.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Providing solutions-defining problems: the imperative of disease prevention in genetic counselling

Author

Listed:
  • Koch, Lene
  • Nordahl Svendsen, Mette

Abstract

Common sense states that problems make people look for solutions. This article proposes the contrary, i.e. that solutions provide the framework within which certain problems can be stated and handled. Drawing on observations of cancer genetic counselling in Denmark and official recommendations concerning the practice of genetic counselling, this article explores how the new prophylactic possibilities become the lens through which risk factors are identified and defined as problems that require action. In particular, the question of how new possibilities to prevent hereditary disease challenge the traditional non-directive ethos of clinical genetics provides the occasion to analyse governmentality processes in clinical genetic dialogues. The article argues that an imperative of choosing disease prevention in genetic counselling transforms the notion of non-directiveness as well as the notions of autonomy and informed consent. The transforming event is the transmission of expert knowledge on genetic risk from counsellor to counsellee. This process of knowledge transmission creates autonomous individuals who, through the medium of choice, consent voluntarily to take personal responsibility for themselves and their relatives. Conceived as a health technology, genetic counselling is a practice through which hegemonic knowledge claims about saving lives by acting responsibly is created. Disease prevention as the solution to increased risks comes to stand out as the right way of relating to oneself, the family, and society.

Suggested Citation

  • Koch, Lene & Nordahl Svendsen, Mette, 2005. "Providing solutions-defining problems: the imperative of disease prevention in genetic counselling," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 823-832, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:60:y:2005:i:4:p:823-832
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(04)00286-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Williams, Clare & Alderson, Priscilla & Farsides, Bobbie, 2002. "Is nondirectiveness possible within the context of antenatal screening and testing?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 339-347, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barberić Lara, 2013. "Genetic Knowledge and Genetic Reproduction Technologies as New Modes of Governance – are We Witnessing a New Form of Eugenics?," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 19(69), pages 33-54, December.
    2. Miller, Fiona Alice & Giacomini, Mita & Ahern, Catherine, 2008. "Contending visions in the evolution of genetic medicine: The case of cancer genetic services in Ontario, Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 152-160, July.
    3. Huniche, Lotte, 2011. "Moral landscapes and everyday life in families with Huntington's disease: Aligning ethnographic description and bioethics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(11), pages 1810-1816, June.
    4. Clarke, Angus & Sarangi, Srikant & Verrier-Jones, Kate, 2011. "Voicing the lifeworld: Parental accounts of responsibility in genetic consultations for polycystic kidney disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(11), pages 1743-1751, June.
    5. Weiner, Kate, 2011. "Exploring genetic responsibility for the self, family and kin in the case of hereditary raised cholesterol," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(11), pages 1760-1767, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Williams, Clare & Ehrich, Kathryn & Farsides, Bobbie & Scott, Rosamund, 2007. "Facilitating choice, framing choice: Staff views on widening the scope of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in the UK," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 1094-1105, September.
    2. Ahmed, Shenaz & Bryant, Louise D. & Tizro, Zahra & Shickle, Darren, 2012. "Interpretations of informed choice in antenatal screening: A cross-cultural, Q-methodology study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(7), pages 997-1004.
    3. Vassy, Carine & Rosman, Sophia & Rousseau, Bénédicte, 2014. "From policy making to service use. Down's syndrome antenatal screening in England, France and the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 67-74.
    4. Ville, Isabelle & Mirlesse, Véronique, 2015. "Prenatal diagnosis: From policy to practice. Two distinct ways of managing prognostic uncertainty and anticipating disability in Brazil and in France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 19-26.
    5. Williams, Clare, 2005. "Framing the fetus in medical work: rituals and practices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(9), pages 2085-2095, May.
    6. Graham, Ruth H. & Robson, Stephen C. & Rankin, Judith M., 2008. "Understanding feticide: An analytic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 289-300, January.
    7. Gammeltoft, Tine & Nguyen, Hanh Thi Thuy, 2007. "Fetal conditions and fatal decisions: Ethical dilemmas in ultrasound screening in Vietnam," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(11), pages 2248-2259, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:60:y:2005:i:4:p:823-832. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.