The emerging international biomedical law tends to recognise the right not to know one’s genetic status. However, the basis and conditions for the exercise of this right remain unclear in domestic laws. In addition to this, such a right has been criticised at the theoretical level as being in contradiction with patient’s autonomy, with doctors’ duty to inform patients, and with solidarity with family members. This happens especially when non-disclosure poses a risk of serious harm to the patient’s relatives who, without that vital information, could be deprived of preventive or therapeutic measures. This paper argues, firstly, that individuals may have a legitimate interest in not knowing their genetic make up to avoid serious psychological consequences; secondly, that this interest, far from being contrary to autonomy, may constitute an enhancement of autonomy; thirdly, that the right not to know cannot be presumed, but must be “activated” by the individual’s explicit choice, and fourthly, that this is not an absolute right, in the sense that it may be restricted when disclosure to the patient is necessary in order to avoid a risk of serious harm to third persons.
- genetic information
- right not to know
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Please note that there is a spelling error in the author affiliation, the correct address details are shown here:
Interdepartmental Center for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities (IZEW)
University of T�bingen
The error is much regretted.
Other content recommended for you
- The new genetics: Genetic testing and public policy
- Clinical applications of preimplantation genetic testing
- Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information
- Familial genetic risks: how can we better navigate patient confidentiality and appropriate risk disclosure to relatives?
- From proband to provider: is there an obligation to inform genetic relatives of actionable risks discovered through direct-to-consumer genetic testing?
- Genetic counselling in ALS: facts, uncertainties and clinical suggestions
- Genetic discrimination in life insurance: empirical evidence from a cross sectional survey of genetic support groups in the United Kingdom
- Genetics and public health—evolution, or revolution?
- Perceptions of genetic discrimination among people at risk for Huntington’s disease: a cross sectional survey
- An evaluation of needs of female BRCA1and BRCA2 carriers undergoing genetic counselling