Risk Assessment and Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

These cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial and ethical implications of identifying at-risk individuals for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) through cancer risk assessment, with or without genetic susceptibility testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment as well as the professional expertise of genetic counselors with significant experience in education and counseling regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Critical components of the process include the ascertainment of medical and family histories, determination and communication of cancer risk, assessment of risk perception, education regarding the genetics of HBOC, discussion of molecular testing for HBOC if appropriate (including benefits, risks and limitations) and any necessary follow-up. These recommendations do not dictate an exclusive course of management or guarantee a specific outcome. Moreover, they do not replace the professional judgment of a health care provider based on the clinical situation of a client.     

Genetic Counseling for Fragile X Syndrome: Updated Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

These recommendations describe the minimum standard criteria for genetic counseling and testing of individuals and families with fragile X syndrome, as well as carriers and potential carriers of a fragile X mutation. The original guidelines (published in 2000) have been revised, replacing a stratified pre- and full mutation model of fragile X syndrome with one based on a continuum of gene effects across the full spectrum of FMR1 CGG trinucleotide repeat expansion. This document reviews the molecular genetics of fragile X syndrome, clinical phenotype (including the spectrum of premature ovarian failure and fragile X-associated tremor-ataxia syndrome), indications for genetic testing and interpretation of results, risks of transmission, family planning options, psychosocial issues, and references for professional and patient resources. These recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group of genetic counselors with expertise in fragile X syndrome genetic counseling, and they are based on clinical experience, review of pertinent English language articles, and reports of expert committees. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a health care provider, familiar with the facts and circumstances of a specific case, will always supersede these recommendations.     

Genetic Evaluation and Counseling of Couples with Recurrent Miscarriage: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for genetic evaluation and counseling of couples with recurrent miscarriage (RM). The recommendations are the opinions of the multidisciplinary Inherited Pregnancy Loss Working Group (IPLWG), with expertise in genetic counseling, medical genetics, maternal fetal medicine, internal medicine, infectious disease, cytogenetics, and coagulation disorders. The IPLWG defines RM as three or more clinically recognized consecutive or non-consecutive pregnancy losses occurring prior to fetal viability (<24 weeks gestation). These recommendations are provided to assist genetic counselors and other health care providers in clinical decision-making, as well as to promote consistency of patient care, guide the allocation of medical resources, and increase awareness of the psychosocial and cultural issues experienced by couples with RM. The IPLWG was convened with support from the March of Dimes Western Washington State Chapter and the University of Washington Division of Medical Genetics. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and are based on clinical experiences, review of pertinent English-language published articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the suspected causes of RM, provides indications for genetic evaluation and testing, addresses psychosocial and cultural considerations, and provides professional and patient resources. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of medical management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a health care provider, familiar with the circumstances of a specific case, should always supersede these recommendations.     

Fabry disease in genetic counseling practice: recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide health care professionals with recommendations for genetic counseling and testing of individuals with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of Fabry disease, with a family history of Fabry disease, and those identified as female carriers of Fabry disease. These recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group of genetic counselors, medical geneticists, and other health professionals with expertise in Fabry disease counseling, as well as an individual with Fabry disease who is a founder of a Fabry disease patient advocacy group in the United States. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and they are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English-language articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the genetics of Fabry disease, the indications for genetic testing and interpretation of results, psychosocial considerations, and references for professional and patient resources. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a healthcare provider, familiar with the facts and circumstances of a specific case, will always supersede these recommendations.     

Genetic Counseling for Fragile X Syndrome: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The National Society of Genetic Counselors' (NSGC) recommendations for fragile X syndrome (FXS) genetic counseling are intended to assist health care professionals who provide genetic counseling for individuals and families in whom the diagnosis of FXS is strongly suspected or has been made. The recommendations are the opinions of genetic counselors with expertise in FXS counseling and are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular client.     

Coming Full Circle: A Reciprocal-Engagement Model of Genetic Counseling Practice

As genetic health care and genetic testing expand from primarily addressing conditions that are exclusively genetic in nature to common diseases with both genetic and environmental components, the scope of genetic counseling has grown. Identification and utilization of a normative model of practice defined by members of the profession is critical as genetic services become more commonplace in medical care. The purpose of this paper is to describe the results of a consensus conference convened to define a model of genetic counseling practice based on the guidance of educators and leaders in the profession. Twenty-three program directors or their representatives from 20 genetic counseling graduate programs in North America listened to presentations and participated in group discussions aimed at determining the elements of a model of practice, including tenets, goals, strategies, and behaviors for addressing patients’ genetic concerns. Their discussion is summarized, training implications and research recommendations are presented, and a model of practice that extends their ideas is proposed.     

Cystic Fibrosis Prenatal Screening in Genetic Counseling Practice: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

For over a decade, prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) has been considered a model for the integration of genetic testing into routine medical practice. Data from pilot studies and public policy discourse have led to recommendations by some professional organizations that CF screening should be offered or made available to pregnant women and their partners, and to couples planning a pregnancy. It is crucial that genetic counselors gain thorough understanding of the complexities of CF and the implications of positive test results, so that they may serve as a reliable, educated referral base and resource for health care providers and their patients. While not all pregnant women will be referred for genetic counseling prior to CF carrier testing, genetic counselors often will be asked to counsel clients after they have a positive test result, or who are found to be at increased risk. Genetic counselors can play an important role in providing accurate and current information as well as support for patients informed decisions. These recommendations were created by a multicenter working group of genetic counselors with expertise in CF and are based on personal clinical experience, review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. The recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care providers professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular client.     

Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

These cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of identifying at-risk individuals through cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cancer Genetic Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Key components include the intake (medical and family histories), psychosocial assessment (assessment of risk perception), cancer risk assessment (determination and communication of risk), molecular testing for hereditary cancer syndromes (regulations, informed consent, and counseling process), and follow-up considerations. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.     

Essential Elements of Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment, Counseling, and Testing: Updated Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Updated from their original publication in 2004, these cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of counseling at-risk individuals through genetic cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Essential components include the intake, cancer risk assessment, genetic testing for an inherited cancer syndrome, informed consent, disclosure of genetic test results, and psychosocial assessment. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.     

Fabry Disease Practice Guidelines: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Identification and comprehensive care of individuals who have Fabry disease (FD) requires a multidisciplinary approach inclusive of genetic testing, test interpretation, genetic counseling, long term disease symptom monitoring, treatment recommendations, and coordination of therapy. The purpose of this document is to provide health care professionals with guidelines for testing, care coordination, identification of psychosocial issues, and to facilitate a better understanding of disease treatment expert recommendations for patients with Fabry disease. These recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group of genetic counselors, medical geneticists, and other health professionals with expertise in Fabry disease counseling, as well as representatives/founders of the two United States based Fabry disease patient advocacy groups who are themselves affected by Fabry disease. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and they are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English-language articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the genetics of Fabry disease, the indications for genetic testing, interpretation of results, psychosocial considerations, and references to professional and patient resources.     

Living with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1: Decent Care-Insufficient Medical and Genetic Information A Qualitative Study of MEN 1 Patients in a Swedish Hospital

This qualitative study explores how 29 Swedish patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) experience living with the condition, appraisal of the clinical follow-up program, and surveys their future expectations. The aim of this study is to build knowledge about this patient group in order to provide optimal care. The participants describe physical, psychological, and social limitations in their daily activities and how these limitations influence quality of life. Our findings indicate that a majority of patients have adjusted to their situation, describing themselves as being healthy despite physical symptoms and treatment. The participants received decent care in the clinical follow-up program, - however, greater effort should be put into patient information. These patients might benefit from genetic counseling. Health professionals involved should recognize their potential impact and influence on a patient’s ability to adjust to these circumstances. Antonovsky`s Sense of Coherence theory is used to discuss these findings.     

The Psychic Costs of Empathic Engagement: Personal and Demographic Predictors of Genetic Counselor Compassion Fatigue

Empathic connection with one’s patients is essential to genetic counselor clinical practice. However, repeatedly engaging with distressed patients may cause compassion fatigue, a phenomenon characterized as feeling overwhelmed by experiencing patients’ suffering. In order to extend findings of an initial qualitative study, we surveyed 222 genetic counselors about their compassion fatigue and factors that predict its occurrence. Multiple regression analysis identified seven significant predictors accounting for 53.7% of the variance in compassion fatigue. Respondents at higher risk of compassion fatigue were more likely to report being burned out, using self-criticism and giving up to manage stress, experiencing a greater variety of distressing clinical events, having larger patient caseloads, relying on religion as a coping strategy, having no children, and seeking support to manage stress. Respondents also provided critical incidents regarding their compassion fatigue and themes in these incidents are described. Practice and research recommendations are provided.     

Interactive Genetic Counseling Role-Play: A Novel Educational Strategy for Family Physicians

Background Family physicians (FPs) are increasingly involved in delivering genetic services. Familiarization with aspects of genetic counseling may enable FPs to help patients make informed choices. Purpose Exploration of interactive role-play as a means to raise FPs’ awareness of the process and content of genetic counseling. Methods FPs attending two large Canadian family medicine conferences in 2005 were eligible—93 participated. FPs discussed a case during a one-on-one session with a genetic counselor. Evaluation involved pre and post intervention questionnaires Results FPs’ baseline genetic knowledge was self-rated as uniformly poor. Baseline confidence was highest in eliciting family history and providing psychosocial support and lowest in discussing risks/benefits of genetic testing and counseling process. Post-intervention, 80% of FPs had better appreciation of family history and 97% indicated this was an effective learning experience. Conclusions Role-play with FPs is effective in raising awareness of the process and content of genetic counseling and may be applied to other health disciplines. This research was funded by: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of Genetics, The Genetics Education Project (funded by the Ontario Women’s Health Council), and GeneSens (funded by a CIHR Interdisciplinary Capacity Enhancement Team Grant).     

Genetic Counseling and Screening of Consanguineous Couples and Their Offspring: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for genetic counseling and screening for consanguineous couples (related as second cousins or closer) and their offspring with the goals of1. providing preconception reproductive options2. improving pregnancy outcome and identifying reproductive choices3. reducing morbidity and mortality in the 1st years of life, and4. respecting psychosocial and multicultural issues.The recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group (the Consanguinity Working Group (CWG)) with expertise in genetic counseling, medical genetics, biochemical genetics, genetic epidemiology, pediatrics, perinatology, and public health genetics, which was convened by the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC). The consensus of the CWG and NSGC reviewers is that beyond a thorough medical family history with follow-up of significant findings, no additional preconception screening is recommended for consanguineous couples. Consanguineous couples should be offered similar genetic screening as suggested for any couple of their ethnic group. During pregnancy, consanguineous couples should be offered maternal–fetal serum marker screening and high-resolution fetal ultrasonography. Newborns should be screened for impaired hearing and detection of treatable inborn errors of metabolism. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a health care provider, familiar with the facts and circumstances of a specific case, will always supersede these recommendations.     

Differential Genetic and Environmental Influences on Reactive and Proactive Aggression in Children

While significant heritability for childhood aggression has been claimed, it is not known whether there are differential genetic and environmental contributions to proactive and reactive forms of aggression in children. This study quantifies genetic and environmental contributions to these two forms of aggression in an ethnically diverse urban sample of 9–10 year old twins (N = 1219), and compares results across different informants (child self-report, mother, and teacher ratings) using the Reactive–Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPQ). Confirmatory factor analysis of RPQ items indicated a significant and strong fit for a two-factor proactive–reactive model which was significantly superior to a one-factor model and which replicated across gender as well as the three informant sources. Males scored significantly higher than females on both self-report reactive and proactive aggression, findings that replicated on mother and teacher versions of the RPQ. Asian–Americans scored lower than most ethnic groups on reactive aggression yet were equivalent to Caucasians on proactive aggression. African–Americans scored higher than other ethnic groups on all measures of aggression except caregiver reports. Heritable influences were found for both forms of aggression across informants, but while boys’ self-reports revealed genetic influences on proactive (50%) and reactive (38%) aggression, shared and non-shared environmental influences almost entirely accounted for girls’ self-report reactive and proactive aggression. Although genetic correlations between reactive and proactive aggression were significant across informants, there was evidence that the genetic correlation was less than unity in boys self reported aggression, indicating that genetic factors differ for proactive and reactive aggression. These findings provide the first evidence for varying genetic and environmental etiologies for reactive and proactive aggression across gender, and provide additional support for distinction between these two forms of aggression.     

Probability Biases in Genetic Problem Solving: A Comparison of Undergraduates, Genetic Counseling Graduate Students, and Genetic Counselors

Heuristics are mental shortcuts that aid people in everyday problem-solving and decision-making. Although numerous studies have demonstrated their use in contexts ranging from consumers’ shopping decisions to experts’ estimations of experimental validity, virtually no published research has addressed heuristics use in problems involving genetic conditions and associated risk probabilities. The present research consists of two studies. In the first study, 220 undergraduates attempted to solve four genetic problems—two common heuristic problems modified to focus on genetic likelihood, and two created to study heuristics and probability rule application. Results revealed that the vast majority of undergraduates used heuristics and also demonstrated a complete misuse of probability rules. In the second study, 156 practicing genetic counselors and 89 genetic counseling students solved slightly modified versions of the genetic problems used in Study 1. Results indicated that a large percentage of both genetic counselors and students used heuristics, but the counselors demonstrated superior problem-solving performance compared to both the genetic counseling students and the undergraduates from Study 1. Research, training, and practice recommendations are presented.     

Transition to the Clinical Doctorate: Attitudes of the Genetic Counseling Training Program Directors in North America

In North America, genetic counseling is an allied health profession where entry level practitioners currently must hold a master’s degree earned from a graduate program accredited by the American Board of Genetic Counseling. This is one of many health care professions that could transition to an entry level clinical doctorate degree. This study explored the attitudes of genetic counseling training program directors toward such a transition. Thirty-one North American program directors were invited to complete an online survey and a follow-up telephone interview. Twenty-one program directors completed the survey and ten directors also completed a follow up phone interview. There was disagreement among the respondents on the issue of transitioning to a clinical doctorate degree (nine in favor, six against and six undecided). Respondents disagreed about whether the transition would lead to higher salaries (six yes, eight no, and seven unsure) or increased professional recognition (eight yes, eight no, and four unsure). Approximately half (n = 10) of directors were not sure if the transition to a clinical doctorate would help or hurt minority recruitment; six thought it would help and four thought it would hurt. However, the majority (n = 13) thought a clinical doctorate would help genetic counselors to obtain faculty positions. If the field transitions to a clinical doctorate, 11 of the directors thought their program would convert, seven were unsure and one thought their program would shut down. Themes identified in interview data included 1) implications for the profession 2) institution-specific considerations and 3) perception of the unknown. Opinions are quite varied at this time regarding the possible transition to the clinical doctorate among genetic counseling training program directors.     

What I Wish I Knew Then...Reflections from Personal Experiences in Counseling about Down Syndrome

Sharing the news about a newborn baby’s diagnosis of Down syndrome with families is a scenario genetic counselors frequently face. Yet often we may feel uncomfortable or unsure how to best support families in this setting in a way that will foster competence and resilience. This commentary is a reflection of one genetic counselor’s experiences in counseling about Down syndrome over the course of her career and how her thinking has transitioned from a medical based model of disability to a more individual and family-focused model. Ideas and suggestions are offered that genetic counselors can incorporate into their practice.     

Parental Narratives About Genetic Testing for Hearing Loss: A One Year Follow Up Study

Few studies examine whether and how parental attitudes towards genetic testing change over time. In this study we interviewed parents of 14 children with newly identified hearing loss at two time points: after referral to genetics and 1 year later. Qualitative analyses of parental narratives indicate that parental attitudes did not change significantly over this time. Parents who perceived genetic testing to be useful continued to value it after testing, while parents who did not perceive it as being useful for their child’s future held the same view a year later. The only parents who changed their views regarding the usefulness of genetic testing for hearing loss were those who reported that their children underwent significant changes in their hearing loss or were faced with other life threatening conditions. Parents were also often unaware of the role of the genetic counselor and how genetic counseling could help address many of their lingering questions and concerns. These emergent themes indicate the need for geneticists and genetic counselors to be aware of and sensitized to the questions and attitudes that bring parents to a genetic evaluation, as well as the reasons why parents may not follow up with genetic testing for hearing loss when recommended.     

Misunderstandings Concerning Genetics Among Patients Confronting Genetic Disease

Critical questions arise about misunderstandings of genetics. We interviewed for 2 h each, 64 individuals who had or were at risk for Huntington’s disease (HD), breast cancer or Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency. These individuals revealed various misunderstandings that can affect coping, and testing, treatment and reproductive decisions. A therapeutic misconception about testing appeared: that testing would be helpful in and of itself. Many believed they could control genetic disorders (even HD), yet these beliefs were often incorrect, and could impede coping, testing, and treatment. Misunderstandings about statistics and genetics often fueled each other, and reflected denial, and desires for hope and control. Emotional needs can thus outweigh understandings of genetics and statistics, and providers’ input. Individuals often maintained non-scientific beliefs, though embarrassed by these. These data have implications for care, and public and professional education. Misunderstandings’ persistence, despite realization of their inaccuracy, suggests that providers need to address not just cognitive facts, but underlying emotional issues.