References

Bowman-Smart H, Savulescu J, Mand C, Gyngell C, Pertile MD, Lewis S, Delatycki MB. ‘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. 2018; 45:231-238 https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2018-105167

Department of Health and Social Care. Safer screening test for pregnant women. 2016. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safer-screening-test-for-pregnant-women (accessed 20 November 2019)

Don't Screen Us Out. Petition signed by over 900 people with Down's syndrome and their families opposing “discriminatory” prenatal screening proposal delivered to Jeremy Hunt. 2018. https://dontscreenusout.org/press-release-people-downs-syndrome-families-deliver-petition-signed-900-people-downs-syndrome-families-opposing-discriminatory/ (accessed 20 November 2019)

‘I nearly aborted my baby because of an unreliable test’. 2019. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-47150878 (accessed 20 November 2019)

Ngan OMY, Yil H, Wong SYS, Sahota D, Ahmed S. Obstetric professionals' perceptions of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome: clinical usefulness compared with existing tests and ethical implications. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2017; 17 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1474-6

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethical issues. 2017. https://nuffieldbioethics.org/publications/non-invasive-prenatal-testing (accessed 20 November 2019)

NIPT implementation: how professionals felt about our face-to-face training and development events. 2018. https://phescreening.blog.gov.uk/2018/09/19/nipt-implementation-how-professionals-felt-about-our-face-to-face-training-and-development-events/ (accessed 20 November 2019)

Suter SM. The tyranny of choice: reproductive selection in the future. Journal of Law Biosciences. 2018; 5:(2)262-300 https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsy014

Non-invasive prenatal testing and decision-making

02 January 2020
2 min read
Volume 28 · Issue 1

Abstract

George F Winter shares his views on NIPT and how it influences decision-making

The phrase ‘tyranny of choice’ has been widely used in recent years to illustrate the increasing range of options that are available to consumers in the developed world. But Suter (2018) uses the term to highlight how reproductive decision-making can sometimes be challenging as a result of technological advances, such as non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT).

In 2016, the Department of Health and Social Care (2016) announced that on the recommendation of the UK National Screening Committee, it had approved NIPT for Down, Edwards' and Patau's syndromes; an accurate maternal blood screening test is undertaken between 10- and 14-weeks' gestation to check for fetal DNA fragments. In 2018, Public Health England reported on the success of eight training events that had been held in preparation for the implementation of an evaluative rollout of NIPT to the fetal anomaly screening pathway, and which had been attended by more than 400 people, including screening midwives, midwives, sonographers and obstetricians (Segalini, 2018).

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting British Journal of Midwifery and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for midwives. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Limited access to our clinical or professional articles

  • Unlimited access to the latest news, blogs and video content

  • Monthly email newsletter