Peer-reviewed article
Parents of newborns in the NICU enrolled in genome sequencing research: hopeful, but not naïve
PURPOSE: In 2014, our institution launched a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing rapid genome sequencing (GS) to standard clinical evaluations of infants with suspected genetic disorders. This study aimed to understand parental…
PURPOSE: In 2014, our institution launched a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing rapid genome sequencing (GS) to standard clinical evaluations of infants with suspected genetic disorders. This study aimed to understand parental response to the use of GS for their newborn babies.
METHODS: Twenty-three of 128 parents whose infant had enrolled in the RCT completed a retrospective survey and interview addressing attitudes about GS and responses to receiving diagnostic information. We also collected information about participants' genetic literacy, genetic knowledge, numeracy, and symptoms of anxiety and depression.
RESULTS: The majority reported positive (13; 56.5%) or neutral 4 (4; 17.4%) feelings when approached about GS for their infant and 100% felt that GS was generally beneficial. The 12 participants who had received a unifying diagnosis for their child's symptoms described personal utility of the information. Some reported the diagnosis led to changes in medical care. Participants showed understanding of some of the psychological risks of GS. For example, 21 (91.3%) agreed or strongly agreed that genetic testing could reveal disturbing results.
CONCLUSIONS: Parents who enrolled their newborn in a RCT of GS demonstrated awareness of a psychological risk, but generally held positive beliefs about GS and perceived the benefits outweighed the risk.
Related writing.
Why the Dutch Keep Pediatric Euthanasia Illegal
Pediatric euthanasia in The Netherlands has a unique legal status - it is illegal, openly practiced, and well-regulated. The most surprising part isn't the law that enabled this — it's what happened after.
The Tiniest Patients: Rethinking How We Decide
	When a baby is born at 22 or 23 weeks of pregnancy — half the normal gestational period — doctors and parents face one of the most agonizing decisions in all of medicine. Should they fight to keep the baby alive, knowing survival is u
When facts are not fixed: rethinking shared decision making at the margins of neonatal viability.
Parents and doctors face difficult decisions when a baby is born at the borderline of viability. Somehow, they must voice their values, shared concerns, and disagreements in a way that allows an initial decision about life-sustaining…
Survival After Court-Ordered Treatment Withdrawal
NR (as he is named in UK court documents) was born in 2020 with a malformed brain. He had, callosal agenesis, cortical dysgyria, dysplastic basal ganglia, a cleft lip and palate, and anopththalmia (no eyeballs). He was not expected to survi
About the author
John D. Lantos is a pediatrician and bioethicist writing on AI in medicine, neonatal intensive care, and end-of-life decisions. His essays appear in JAMA, JAMA Pediatrics, the Hastings Center Report, the New England Journal of Medicine, and Aeon. Read more about John.