S Jeanne A N Arnold, Diewertje Houtman, Isabel R A Retel Helmrich, Sander R Hilberink, Sam R Riedijk
{"title":"An exploration of the perspectives of Dutch adults experiencing a genetic condition on human germline gene editing.","authors":"S Jeanne A N Arnold, Diewertje Houtman, Isabel R A Retel Helmrich, Sander R Hilberink, Sam R Riedijk","doi":"10.1007/s12687-025-00792-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Views of people with a genetic condition are crucial in deliberations on human germline gene editing (HGGE), but their perspectives are at risk to be devalued due to epistemic injustice and insufficient attention for the possible sensitivities surrounding HGGE. This study set out to explore the perspectives of people dealing with a genetic condition regarding HGGE, and the possible sensitivities surrounding this topic. We conducted a 2-phase qualitative interview (N = 29) and focus group study (N = 9) on the perspectives of people with or carrying a genetic condition and family members regarding HGGE. Insights from the interviews were used in the organization of the focus groups. We included 38 persons who have experiences with 18 different genetic conditions. Three main themes were identified: personal deliberation on HGGE, HGGE in the context of reproductive decision making and the impact of HGGE on society. Participants stated discussing the topic was controversial, complicated and overwhelming. An informal setting with peer support helped them to process their thoughts and feelings. This study found three main conclusions. First, the perspectives on HGGE are highly influenced by the perception of a genetic condition as a burden or as part of an identity. Secondly, in the deliberation on HGGE, many participants experienced a conflict between accepting a genetic condition and taking action to mitigate potential harm. Thirdly, the subject and object of the deliberation on HGGE mattered: for whom and what for? Moreover, this study has yielded pragmatic recommendations to accommodate sensitivities around discussing HGGE.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"489-501"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12401827/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-025-00792-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Views of people with a genetic condition are crucial in deliberations on human germline gene editing (HGGE), but their perspectives are at risk to be devalued due to epistemic injustice and insufficient attention for the possible sensitivities surrounding HGGE. This study set out to explore the perspectives of people dealing with a genetic condition regarding HGGE, and the possible sensitivities surrounding this topic. We conducted a 2-phase qualitative interview (N = 29) and focus group study (N = 9) on the perspectives of people with or carrying a genetic condition and family members regarding HGGE. Insights from the interviews were used in the organization of the focus groups. We included 38 persons who have experiences with 18 different genetic conditions. Three main themes were identified: personal deliberation on HGGE, HGGE in the context of reproductive decision making and the impact of HGGE on society. Participants stated discussing the topic was controversial, complicated and overwhelming. An informal setting with peer support helped them to process their thoughts and feelings. This study found three main conclusions. First, the perspectives on HGGE are highly influenced by the perception of a genetic condition as a burden or as part of an identity. Secondly, in the deliberation on HGGE, many participants experienced a conflict between accepting a genetic condition and taking action to mitigate potential harm. Thirdly, the subject and object of the deliberation on HGGE mattered: for whom and what for? Moreover, this study has yielded pragmatic recommendations to accommodate sensitivities around discussing HGGE.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals.
Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues.
The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries.
The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.