UC Irvine

The National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Code of Ethics outlines the professional and ethical obligations genetic counselors have to themselves, their patients, their colleagues, and society. These guidelines stress the importance of patients’ autonomy and informed consent. One interpretation of the NSGC Code of Ethics is that prenatal genetic counselors should also discuss the option of abortion with patients in order to cover all necessary facts and options. However, institutions with religiously-based policies (RBPs) that prevent genetic counselors from freely discussing abortion with patients seem to contradict the NSGC Code of Ethics. There is very little information in the current literature about genetic counselors’ opinions on this potential conflict and its impacts. This study aimed to explore genetic counselors’ attitudes towards RBPs, what characteristics of genetic counselors are associated with attitudes towards RBPs, and what characteristics are associated with genetic counselors’ willingness to work in settings with RBPs. A survey was developed to measure genetic counselors’ opinions on RBPs and interest levels in working in fictitious prenatal settings with various policies regarding abortion discussions. Overall, genetic counselors did not support the implementation of RBPs that limit abortion discussions (n=152, 86%) and believed that such policies do not align with the NSGC Code of Ethics (n=157, 90%). Most of the participants viewed abortion as moral (n=144, 77%), were comfortable counseling about abortion (n=124, 71%), and described themselves as liberal (n=134, 78%) or not very religious (n=131, 76%). These participants were more likely to express low support for RBPs (p≤0.002) and were less interested in working at institutions with policies limiting abortion discussions (p<0.001). The findings of this study raise concerns for the quality and equity of genetic counseling services in settings with certain RBPs. As the political landscape shifts and abortion rights continue to be challenged, the findings of this study may encourage genetic counselors to advocate for additional NSGC guidance and ethical policies in the prenatal setting at the institutional and governmental level.