Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T06:38:44.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Screening of Newborns for Disorders with High Benefit-Risk Ratios Should Be Mandatory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Nicole Kelly ,
Dalia Chehayeb Makarem  and
Melissa P. Wasserstein
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Newborn screening has evolved to include an increasingly complex spectrum of diseases, raising concerns that screening should be optional and require parental consent. Early detection of disorders like PKU and MCAD is essential to prevent serious disability and death in affected children. These are examples of high benefit-risk ratio disorders because of the irrefutable health benefits of early detection, coupled with the low risks of treatment. The dire consequences of not diagnosing an infant with a treatable disorder because of parental refusal to screen are wholly unacceptable. Thus, we believe that newborn screening for disorders with high benefit-risk ratios should continue to be mandatory.

Type
Symposium Articles
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 44 , Issue 2: Ethical and Legal Issues in Pediatrics , Summer 2016 , pp. 231 - 240
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Grosse, S. D., Boyle, C. A., Kenneson, A., Khoury, M. J., and Wilfond, B. S., “From Public Health Emergency to Public Health Service: The Implications of Evolving Criteria for Newborn screening Panels,” Pediatrics 117, no. 3 (2006): 923-929.Google Scholar
Ross, L. F., “Mandatory Versus Voluntary Consent for Newborn Screening?” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20, no. 4 (2010): 299-328; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “CDC Grand Rounds: Newborn Screening and Improved Outcomes,” MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 61, no. 21 (2012): 390-393, available at <http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6121a2.htm> (last visited April 21, 2016).Google Scholar
Arnold, C. G., “Two Faces of Patient Advocacy: The Current Controversy in Newborn Screening,” Journal of Medical Ethics 40, no. 8 (2014): 558-562.Google Scholar
Kilakkathi, V., Report by the Council for Responsible Genetics, Newborn Screening in America: Problems and Policies (2012): 1-43, available at <http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/WNMAKEPP1P.pdf> (last visited April 21, 2016); Whelan, A. M., “That's My Baby: Why the State's Interest in Promoting Public Health Does Not Justify Residual Newborn Blood Spot Research without Parental Consent,” Minnesota Law Review 98, no. 1 (2013): 419-453.Google Scholar
President's Council on Bioethics (U.S.), The Changing Moral Focus of Newborn screening: An Ethical Analysis by the President's Council on Bioethics, (December 2008), available at <http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/reports/newborn_screening/Newborn%20Screening%20for%20the%20web.pdf> (last visited April 21, 2016). (last visited April 21, 2016).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=President's+Council+on+Bioethics+(U.S.),+The+Changing+Moral+Focus+of+Newborn+screening:+An+Ethical+Analysis+by+the+President's+Council+on+Bioethics,+(December+2008),+available+at++(last+visited+April+21,+2016).>Google Scholar
Wilson, J. M. G. and Jungner, G., “Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease,” World Health Organization (WHO) Bulletin, Public Health Papers, no. 34 (1968), available at <http://whqlibdoc.who.int/php/WHO_PHP_34.pdf> (last visited April 21, 2016).Google Scholar
See supra note 3.Google Scholar
See supra notes 3 and 6.Google Scholar
Pitt, J. J., “Newborn Screening,” The Clinical Biochemist Review 31, no. 2 (2010): 57-68.Google Scholar
See CDC, supra note 2; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Discretionary Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children, Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (as of February 2016), available at <http://www.hrsa.gov/advisorycommittees/mchbadvisory/heritabledisorders/> (last visited April 21, 2016).+(last+visited+April+21,+2016).>Google Scholar
Therrell, B. L., Johnson, A., and Williams, D., “Status of Newborn Screening Programs in the United States,” Pediatrics 117, no. 5 Pt 2 (2006): S212-S252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, B. K., Etchegary, H., Nicholls, S. G., Wilson, B. J., Craigie, S. M., and Araia, M. H., “Education and Parental Involvement in Decision-Making about Newborn Screening: Understanding Goals to Clarify Content,” Journal of Genetic Counseling 24, no. 3 (2015): 400-408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Newborn Screening Laboratory Bulletin (October 2008), available at <http://www.cdc.gov/nbslabbulletin/pdf/nslb_bulletin.pdf> (last visited April 21, 2016).+(last+visited+April+21,+2016).>Google Scholar
See supra note 13; Blout, C., Walsh Vockley, C., Gaviglio, A., Fox, M., Croke, B., and Williamson Dean, L., The Newborn Screening Task Force on Behalf of the NSGC Public Policy Committee, “Newborn Screening: Education, Consent, and the Residual Blood Spot. The Position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors,” Journal of Genetic Counseling 23, no. 1 (2014): 16-19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Blout, supra note 15.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.; Lewis, M. H., Goldenberg, A., Anderson, R., Rothwell, E., and Botkin, J., “State Laws Regarding the Retention and Use of Residual Newborn screening Blood Samples,” Pediatrics 127, no. 4 (2011): 703-712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Lewis, supra note 17.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, HHS Announces Proposal to Improve Rules Protecting Human Research Subjects, News Release, July 22 2011, available at <http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/nprm-home/> (last visited May 17, 2016).+(last+visited+May+17,+2016).>Google Scholar
See supra note 19.Google Scholar
Newborn Screening Saves Lives Reauthorization Act of 2014, Public Law 113-240 § 128 STAT. 2851 (2014), available at <https://www.congress.gov/113/plaws/publ240/PLAW113publ240.pdf> (last visited April 21, 2016).+(last+visited+April+21,+2016).>Google Scholar
Feuchtbaum, L., Cunningham, G., and Sciortino, S., “Questioning the Need for Informed Consent: A Case Study of California's Experience with a Pilot Newborn screening Research Project,” Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 2, no. 3 (2007): 3-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Ross, supra note 2; supra note 3.Google Scholar
See supra note 18.Google Scholar
See Blout, supra note 15.Google Scholar
Olson, S. and Berger, A. C., Challenges and Opportunities in Using Residual Newborn screening Samples for Translational Research: Workshop Summary, Roundtable on Translating Genomic-Based Research for Health (Washington, D. C.: The National Academies Press, 2010), available at <http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12981> (last visited April 21, 2016).Google Scholar
Botkin, J. R., Goldenberg, A. J., Rothwell, E., Anderson, R. A., and Lewis, M. H., “Retention and Research Use of Residual Newborn screening Bloodspots,” Pediatrics 131, no. 1 (2013): 120-127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See supra note 26; Fost, N., “Genetic Diagnosis and Treatment: Ethical Considerations,” American Journal of Disease of Children 147, no. 11 (1993): 1190-1195.Google Scholar
See Ross, supra note 2.Google Scholar
See Fost, supra note 29.Google Scholar
Brosco, J. P., Sanders, L. M., Seider, M. I., and Dunn, A. C., “Adverse Medical Outcomes of Early Newborn screening Programs for Phenylketonuria,” Pediatrics 122, no. 1 (2008): 192-197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermans, S. and Buchbinder, M., “Patients-in-Waiting: Living between Sickness and Health in the Genomics Era,” Journal of Health Social Behavior 51, no. 4 (2010): 408-423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserstein, M. P., Andriola, M., Arnold, G., Aron, A., Duffner, P., Erbe, R. W., Escolar, M. L., Estrella, L., Galvin-Parton, P., Iglesias, A., Kay, D. M., Kronn, D. F., Kurtzberg, J., Kwon, J. M., Langan, T. J., Levy, P. A., Naidich, T. P., Orsini, J. J., Pellegrino, J. E., Provenzale, J. M., Wenger, D. A., and M. Caggana for the New York State Krabbe Consortium, “Clinical Outcomes of Newborn Screening for Krabbe Disease in New York State,” Genetics in Medicine (In Press, 2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenger, D. A. “Krabbe Disease,” Updated March 2011, in Pagon, R. A., Adam, M. P., Bird, T. D., Dolan, C. R., Fong, C. T. and Stephens, K., eds., GeneReviews [Internet], (Seattle, WA: University of Washington, 1993-2013), available at <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1238/> (last visited April 21, 2016).Google Scholar
See supra note 3.Google Scholar
See supra note 3.Google Scholar
See Fost, supra note 29.Google Scholar
Waldo, A., “The Texas Newborn Bloodspot Saga Has Reached a Sad – and Preventable – Conculsion,” Genomics Lab Report [Internet], a publication of the law firm Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson (March 16, 2010), available at <http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2010/03/16/the-texas-newborn-bloodspot-saga-has-reached-a-sad-and-preventable-conclusion/> (last visited April 21, 2016); Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), Lawsuit Settlement Allows Newborn Screening to Program to Move Forward, News Release (January 13, 2014), available at <http://www.health.state.mn.us/news/pressrel/2014/newbornscreening011314.html> (last visited April 21, 2016).+(last+visited+April+21,+2016);+Minnesota+Department+of+Health+(MDH),+Lawsuit+Settlement+Allows+Newborn+Screening+to+Program+to+Move+Forward,+News+Release+(January+13,+2014),+available+at++(last+visited+April+21,+2016).>Google Scholar
Id. (MDH).Google Scholar
Id. (MDH).Google Scholar
See Ross, supra note 2.Google Scholar
See Fost, supra note 29.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See supra note 14.Google Scholar
Pass, K., Green, N. S., Lorey, F., Sherwin, J., and Comeau, A. M., “Pilot Programs in Newborn Screening,” Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 12, no. 4 (2006): 293-300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, R. R., “We Need Expanded Newborn Screening,” Pediatrics 117, no. 5 (2006): 1800-1805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See supra note 23.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See Pass, supra note 47.Google Scholar
Botkin, J. R., Lewis, M. H., Watson, M. S., Swoboda, K. J., Anderson, R., Berry, S. A., Bonhomme, N., Brosco, J. P., Comeau, A. M., Goldenberg, A., Goldman, E., Therrell, B., Levy-Fisch, J., Tarini, B., and Wilfond, B. on behalf of the Bioethics and Legal Work Group of the Newborn Screening Translational Research Network, “Parental Permission for Pilot Newborn Screening Research: Guidelines from the NBSTRN,’ Pediatrics 133, no. 2 (2014): e410-e417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See supra note 48.Google Scholar
See supra note 23.Google Scholar
See Fost, supra note 29.Google Scholar
See Ross, supra note 2.Google Scholar
See supra note 5.Google Scholar
Davis, T. C., Humiston, S. G., Arnold, C. L., Bocchini, J. A. Jr., Bass, P. F. 3rd, Kennen, E. M., Bocchini, A., Kyler, P., and Lloyd-Puryear, M., “Recommendations for Effective Newborn screening Communication: Results of Focus Groups with Parents, Providers, and Experts,” Pediatrics 117, no. 5 Pt 2 (2006): S326-S340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See supra note 29.Google Scholar
See supra note 59.Google Scholar
See supra note 59; Tluczek, A., Orland, K. M., Nick, S. W., and Brown, R. L., “Newborn Screening: An Appeal for Improved Parent Education,” Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing 23, no. 4 (2009): 326-334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Table 1 modified from supra note 3; Andermann, A., Blancquaert, I., Beauchamp, S., and Dery, V., “Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the Genomic Age: A Review of Screening Criteria over the Past 40 Years,” Bulletin of the World Health Organization 86, no. 4 (2008): 317-319, available at <http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/4/07-050112/en/> (last visited April 21, 2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar