Citations

The application of gene editing technologies to prevent or mitigate genetic disease in humans is considered one of its most promising applications. However, as the technology advances, it is imperative to understand the views of the broader public on how it should be used. We conducted focus groups to understand public views on the ethical permissibility and governance of gene editing technologies in humans. A total of 50 urban and semirural residents in the upper Midwest took part in six focus groups. Participants expressed multiple concerns about nonmedical uses of gene editing and its potential for unknown harms to human health, and were divided as to whether the individual patient or “medical experts” should be charged with overseeing the scope of its application. As potential stakeholders, the perspectives from the general public are critical to assess as genome editing technologies advance toward the clinic.

Increased prenatal diagnoses of sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) amid limited knowledge of their prognoses heighten the need to understand how families contend with the implications of an SCA. To explore the experiences of parents and individuals who received a genetic diagnosis of an SCA (excluding Turner syndrome), we conducted semistructured qualitative telephone interviews with 43 participants affected by these conditions. Parents (n = 35) and individuals (n = 8) expressed almost unanimous interest in more optimistic portrayals of their condition from their providers, even when the prognosis is uncertain. While some participants reported success in receiving accurate information from their provider and identifying supportive resources, numerous families received outdated or misleading information about their condition and lacked direction in accessing follow-up care and support. Parents desire greater coordination of their child’s medical care and access to care that approaches an SCA holistically. Opportunities remain to improve the diagnosis and care of individuals with SCAs.