Search

‘Experiential knowledge’ is increasingly recognised as an important influence on reproductive decision-making. ‘Experiential knowledge of disability’ in particular is a significant resource within prenatal testing/screening contexts, enabling prospective parents to imagine and appraise future lives affected by disability. However, the concept of ‘experiential knowledge’ has been widely critiqued for its idiosyncrasy, its impermanence and consequently its perceived inferiority to (medical) knowledge. This paper explores some of these key critiques of experiential knowledge through an analysis of its constitution and uses in the context of reproductive decision-making. Seventeen UK-resident women with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), or with SMA in their family, took part in two in-depth interviews: one in 2007–9 and the other in 2013–4. By comparing and contrasting these women's accounts at two time points, this paper demonstrates the stark contrast between ‘lived experience’ of SMA (the visceral everyday realities of life with the condition) and the various way(s) this experience was transformed into, and presented as, ‘knowledge’ through the processes of making, and accounting, for reproductive decisions. The analysis highlights that multiple, distinct and sometimes competing experiential frameworks are used to conceptualise SMA across time and context. However, rather than evidence of its fallibility, this finding highlights that ‘knowledge’ is an inappropriate vessel with which to capture and transfer ‘experiential knowledge’. Rather, we need to consider how to value such insight in ways that harnesses its inherent strength without leaving it vulnerable to the epistemological critiques attracted by labelling it ‘knowledge’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Exponential growth in genomics has led to public and private initiatives worldwide that have dramatically increased the number of procreative couples who are aware of their ability to transmit genetic disorders to their future children. Understanding how couples process the meaning of being genetically at-risk for their procreative life lags far behind the advances in genomic and reproductive sciences. Moreover, society, policy makers, and clinicians are not aware of the experiences and nuances involved when modern couples are faced with using Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). The purpose of this study was to discover the decision-making process of genetically at-risk couples as they decide whether to use PGD to prevent the transmission of known single-gene or sex-linked genetic disorders to their children. A qualitative, grounded theory design guided the study in which 22 couples (44 individual partners) from the USA, who were actively considering PGD, participated. Couples were recruited from June 2009 to May 2010 from the Internet and from a large PGD center and a patient newsletter. In-depth semi-structured interviews were completed with each individual partner within the couple dyad, separate from their respective partner. We discovered that couples move through four phases (Identify, Contemplate, Resolve, Engage) of a complex, dynamic, and iterative decision-making process where multiple, sequential decisions are made. In the Identify phase, couples acknowledge the meaning of their at-risk status. Parenthood and reproductive options are explored in the Contemplate phase, where 41% of couples remained for up to 36 months before moving into the Resolve phase. In Resolve, one of three decisions about PGD use is reached, including: Accepting, Declining, or Oscillating. Actualizing decisions occur in the Engage phase. Awareness of the decision-making process among genetically at-risk couples provides foundational work for understanding critical processes and aids in identifying important gaps for intervention and future research. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The diffusion of antenatal screening programmes for Down syndrome has triggered much discussion about their powerful potential to enhance pregnant women''s autonomy and reproductive choices. Simultaneously, considerable debate has been engendered by concerns that such programmes may directly contribute to the emergence of new and complex ethical, legal and social dilemmas for women. Given such discussion and debate, an examination of women''s decision-making within the context of antenatal screening for Down syndrome is timely. This paper aims to undertake a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies examining the factors influencing pregnant women''s decisions to accept or decline antenatal screening for Down syndrome. The meta-synthesis aims to create more comprehensive understandings and to develop theory which might enable midwives and other healthcare professionals to better meet the needs of pregnant women as they make their screening decisions. Ten electronic health and social science databases were searched together with a hand-search of eleven journals for papers published in English between 1999 and 2008, using predefined search terms, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a quality appraisal framework. Nine papers met the criteria for this meta-synthesis, providing an international perspective on pregnant women''s decision-making. Twelve themes were identified by consensus and combined into five core concepts. These core concepts were: destination unknown; to choose or not to choose; risk is rarely pure and never simple; treading on dreams, and betwixt and between. A conceptual framework is proposed which incorporates these themes and core concepts, and provides a new insight into pregnant women''s complex decision-making processes with regard to antenatal screening for Down syndrome. However, further research is necessary to determine whether or not the development of a model of decision-making may empower pregnant women in making choices about screening. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Prenatal screening for Down's syndrome and other chromosomal anomalies has become common obstetrical practice. The purpose of this intervention is to provide women with the information needed to make informed reproductive choices. It is assumed that the ethical beliefs of parents play an important role in decision-making about whether to undergo testing, but little is known about their precise significance. More insight into how women conceptualize their choice of using prenatal screening tests may clarify the impact of personal ethical beliefs. With this aim, we conducted qualitative research consisting of semi-structured interviews with 59 women in the Netherlands who were offered a prenatal screening test. The analysis showed that the ethical views between acceptors and decliners showed similar diversity. In contrast with the currently accepted view, we conclude that ethical beliefs are one of the factors implicated in the decision. Women decide about prenatal testing by balancing the information provided by the test against the risks of further investigation, the emotional burden of a disabled child on their well-being and life perspective, as well as on those of family members. Normative moral principles are introduced once the choice is made, namely as factors in justifying and supporting the decision. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]