IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v59y2004i3p553-565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accommodating risk: Responses to BRCA1/2 genetic testing of women who have had cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Hallowell, N.
  • Foster, C.
  • Eeles, R.
  • Ardern-Jones, A.
  • Watson, M.

Abstract

The relationship between risk awareness and anxiety has been the subject of extensive theoretical debate and empirical research. Previous studies of women with a family history of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer suggest that both healthy at-risk women and former cancer patients report increased anxiety upon learning about their increased risks of developing these diseases. Indeed, anxiety about genetic risks has been reported as influencing decisions about DNA-testing and risk-reducing surgery on healthy breasts and ovaries. This qualitative study of women who had been treated for breast/ovarian cancer investigated their perceptions of, and reactions to, their genetic risks of developing further cancers following genetic testing (BRCA1/2 mutation searching). In-depth interviews were undertaken with 30 women (10 mutation carriers, 8 awaiting a result and 12 who received an inconclusive test result). Whilst the majority of women in all three groups adopted a fatalistic approach with regard to their future health and did not regard their genetic risks as a threat to self, a few reported heightened anxiety on learning they were at increased risk of developing a second primary cancer. The data suggest that affected women understand their genetic risks of cancer within the context of their previous disease experiences. It is observed that women's responses to their genetic risk are influenced by the degree to which they have accommodated their risk status in their biography following their diagnosis and treatment of cancer.

Suggested Citation

  • Hallowell, N. & Foster, C. & Eeles, R. & Ardern-Jones, A. & Watson, M., 2004. "Accommodating risk: Responses to BRCA1/2 genetic testing of women who have had cancer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 553-565, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:59:y:2004:i:3:p:553-565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(03)00618-X
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shostak, Sara & Zarhin, Dana & Ottman, Ruth, 2011. "What's at stake? Genetic information from the perspective of people with epilepsy and their family members," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(5), pages 645-654, September.
    2. Ross, Emily & Swallow, Julia & Kerr, Anne & Chekar, Choon Key & Cunningham-Burley, Sarah, 2021. "Diagnostic layering: Patient accounts of breast cancer classification in the molecular era," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    3. Saukko, Paula M. & Richards, Suzanne H. & Shepherd, Maggie H. & Campbell, John L., 2006. "Are genetic tests exceptional? Lessons from a qualitative study on thrombophilia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(7), pages 1947-1959, October.
    4. Kerr, Anne & Hill, Rosemary L. & Till, Christopher, 2018. "The limits of responsible innovation: Exploring care, vulnerability and precision medicine," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 24-31.

    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:59:y:2004:i:3:p:553-565. 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.