The Holocaust and the racial hygiene doctrine that helped rationalize it still overshadow contemporary debates about using gene editing for disease prevention.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E49-54. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.49.
Physicians should provide women considering abortion after Down syndrome screening with unbiased information and not attempt to influence their decision.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):359-364. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.ecas1-1604.
Kyle B. Brothers, MD, PhD and Esther E. Knapp, MD, MBE
Direct-to-consumer genetic testing requires that physicians share decision making with patients, not order unnecessary tests or interventions, and refer to genetic specialists when necessary.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E812-818. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.812.
Developing technologies for personalized medicine may be misused to popularize the idea that one can infer a person’s genetic makeup from observer-defined or self-reported assignment to a race or ethnic group.
Ruth M. Farrell, MD, MA, Holly Pederson, MD, and Shilpa Padia, MD
Though they claim to, direct-to-consumer genetic tests may not correctly identify an individual's ancestral background, and thus may overstate or understate one's risk for heritable disease.
J. Brian Szender, MD, MS and Shashikant B. Lele, MD
The estimated reduction in risk of ovarian cancer for any woman undergoing opportunistic removal of the Fallopian tubes is up to 50 percent, but whether removal is more beneficial than ligation has not been established.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(9):843-848. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.9.stas1-1509.