Personalized medicine with its promise of developing interventions tailored to an individual's health need and genetically related response to treatment might seem a promising antidote to the documented underutilization of standard depression treatments by African Americans. In addition, understanding depression not merely in biochemical terms but also in genetic terms might seem to counter cultural beliefs and stigma that attach to depression when conceived as a mood or behavioral problem under an individual's control. After all, if there is one thing (...) for which a person is not responsible and cannot be blamed, it is her genes. Nevertheless, for multiple reasons, a personalized medical approach to depression treatment, and its attendant conceptualization of depression and treatment response as genetically influenced, present the risk of exacerbating well-documented disparities in access to, and utilization of, treatment for depression among African-American and Caucasian elderly adults. (shrink)

Most of the literature on pharmacogenetics assumes that the main problems in implementing the technology will be institutional ones and that although it involves genetic testing, the ethical issues involved in pharmacogenetics are different from, even less than, ‘traditional’ genetic testing. Very little attention has been paid to how clinicians will accept this technology, their attitudes towards it and how it will affect clinical practice.This paper presents results from interviews with clinicians who are beginning to use pharmacogenetics and explores how (...) they view the ethics of pharmacogenetic testing, its use to exclude some patients from treatment, and how this kind of testing fits into broader debates around genetics. In particular this paper examines the attitudes of breast cancer and Alzheimer’s disease specialists. The results of these interviews will be compared with the picture of pharmacogenetics painted in the published literature, as a way of rooting this somewhat speculative writing in clinical practice. (shrink)

Uncertainty for policy makers is not new but the pressure to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty is perhaps greater than ever. The arrival of new scientific developments such as pharmacogenetics offers potentially great benefits . They have passionate supporters as well as doubters. The evidence is often extensive but unclear and policy makers may find themselves under pressure to make decisions before they feel that the evidence is compelling.The UK is particularly well placed to play a leading role in (...) the development of pharmacogenetics and is equally well placed to derive the benefits to both health and wealth that could flow from this. However, the uncertainties threaten to overwhelm the capacity of policy makers to act effectively. The uncertainties are both about the context within which the science and delivery of pharmacogentics is being developed and about the interests that could be served. This paper maps these uncertainties and concludes with some suggestions, drawing on deliberative democracy and futures thinking, as to how policy makers might manage the tensions and dilemmas they face by moving from an unstable, emergent policy arena to a more stable one. (shrink)

In September this year the Nuffield Council on Bioethics held a meeting to disclose and discuss the main findings of their newly published report on the ethical issues associated with developments in pharmacogenetics research. The basics of pharmacogenetics science is briefly outlined, and then the extent to which the report was successful in addressing the attendant social, ethical, and policy implications of pharmacogenetics research is evaluated.

ABSTRACT Numerous benefits for patients have been predicted if prescribing decisions were routinely accompanied by pharmacogenetic testing. So far, little attention has been paid to the possibility that the routine application of this new technology could result in considerable harm to patients. This article emphasises that pharmacogenetic testing shares both the opportunities and the pitfalls with ‘conventional’ disease‐genetic testing. It demonstrates that performing pharmacogenetic tests as well as interpreting the results are extraordinarily complex issues requiring a high level of expertise. (...) It further argues that pharmacogenetic testing can have a huge impact on clinical decisions and may influence the therapeutic strategy as well as the clinical monitoring of a patient. This view challenges the predominant paradigm that pharmacogenetic testing will predict patients’ responses to medicines, but that it will not provide any other significant disease‐specific predictive information about the patient or family members. The article also questions published proposals to reduce the consent procedure for pharmacogenetic testing to a simple statement that the physician wishes to test a sample of the patient's DNA to see if a drug will be safe or whether it will work, and presents an alternative model that is better suited to protect patients’ interests and to obtain meaningful informed consent. The paper concludes by outlining conditions for the application of pharmacogenetic testing in clinical practice in a way that can make full use of its potential benefits while minimising possible harm to patients and their families. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Pharmacogenetics is a rapidly expanding area of research exploring the relationship between inter‐individual genetic variation and drug response, with the goal of developing genetically optimised therapies. Slippery slope arguments claim that a particular action should be rejected (or supported) because it might be the first step onto a slippery slope leading to undesirable (or desirable) consequences. In this article, several slippery slope arguments relevant to the context of pharmacogenetics are evaluated under consideration of underlying reasons for their popularity. The (...) author concludes that although the examined arguments are unconvincing as slippery slope arguments, they do matter in this context. While positive slippery slope arguments serve as a driving force to fuel the development of pharmacogenetics, their negative counterparts play an important role to sensitise policy makers and the public to potential problems. (shrink)