IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v54y2002i9p1333-1344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudes to bioethical issues: a case study of a screening project

Author

Listed:
  • Gustafsson Stolt, U.
  • Liss, P. -E.
  • Svensson, T.
  • Ludvigsson, J.

Abstract

Commonly expressed in theoretical discussions about ethical problems in the context of epidemiology and screening is the need for more data. A study was carried out involving 21 explorative interviews with participant and nonparticipant mothers in a neonatal research screening project in progress in Sweden, ABIS (All Babies in Southeast Sweden). The respondents were asked, by way of open-ended questions, to give their opinions about certain ethical issues: informed consent; reasons for joining/declining; surrogate decision; the collection, analysis and storage of written and "live" material (biobanks); intervention etc. The ethical implications mentioned in the literature mostly concern the risk of creating distress and anxiety (anxiety and possible stigmatisation in respect of positive or false-positive results, worry about material collected and stored, distress caused by blood sampling procedures, etc.). Our results do not support the idea that the risks are substantial. The respondents rather indicate an attitude of benevolence--they are positive both to the current research on children, to the material they contribute (both written material and "biomaterial"), to possible results and intervention plans. On the other hand the participants expressed concern about the storage of material and the right to be informed of any screening/project results. Further studies in this field are needed and would be of help in theoretical discussion, the work of ethical committees and the designing of, for example, screening and research projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustafsson Stolt, U. & Liss, P. -E. & Svensson, T. & Ludvigsson, J., 2002. "Attitudes to bioethical issues: a case study of a screening project," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(9), pages 1333-1344, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:54:y:2002:i:9:p:1333-1344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(01)00099-5
    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.

    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:54:y:2002:i:9:p:1333-1344. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.