Search

Abstract: Understanding the psychosocial impact of a congenital condition such as Down syndrome on affected individuals and their family requires an understanding of the cultural context in which they are situated. This study carried out in 2008 used Q-Methodology to characterize understandings of Down syndrome (DS) in Pakistan in a sample of health professionals, researchers and parents of children with the condition. Fifty statements originally developed for a UK study and translated into Urdu were Q-sorted by 60 participants. The use of factor analytic techniques identified three independent accounts and qualitative data collected during the Q-sorting exercise supported their interpretation. In two accounts, the ‘will of God’ was central to an understanding of the existence of people with DS although perceptions about the value and quality of life of the affected individual differed significantly between these accounts as did views about the impact on the family. The third account privileged a more ‘scientific worldview’ of DS as a genetic abnormality but also a belief that society can further contribute to disabling those affected. Attitudes towards prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy demonstrated that a belief in the will of Allah was not necessarily associated with a rejection of these technologies. Accounts reflect the religious, cultural and economic context of Pakistan and issues associated with raising a child with a learning disability in that country. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: How far does ethnicity/culture/religion mediate couples’ responses to genetic risk? This paper examines the responses of 51 British Pakistani couples referred to a genetics clinic in southern England to counselling about recurrence risks for genetic problems in children. It is based on fieldwork conducted between 2000 and 2004 that combined participant observation of genetics consultations with interviews in respondents’ homes. Interviews were conducted with 62 adults in connection with these 51 cases, of which 32 were followed through two or more clinical consultations and 12 through more than one pregnancy. Risk responses were categorized as: taking the risk; postponing; exploring risk management or dismissing the risk as irrelevant to current circumstances. Responses were cross-referenced for associations with the severity of the condition, number of affected and unaffected children, availability of a prenatal test, age, gender, and migration history. I found that most couples were initially risk-takers who already had an unaffected child or children. Couples caring for living children with severe conditions were more likely to postpone. However, the risk responses of 15 couples changed over time, most towards and some away from risk management, reflecting changes in couples’ appreciation of the severity of the condition and their subsequent reproductive experiences. The study highlights the diversity and dynamism of responses within one ethnic group and challenges stereotypes about cultural and religious responses to genetic risk. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]