The authors discuss the results of a survey of the attitudes of Canadian and French (Picardie, Nord-Pas de Calais) physicians toward selective abortion of fetal anomalies detected by ultrasound, amniocentesis, or chorionic villus sampling. The study documents the threshold of acceptability of abortion of fetuses with selected anomalies, as well as the physicians' own perceptions of their role in the decision to abort. While there was no consensus among all Canadian physicians regarding the acceptability of abortion, more than 55 percent from France and Quebec would accept selective abortion of a fetus affected with trisomy 21, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, Huntington's chorea, or spina bifida. In the province of Quebec, Anglophone physicians showed a greater acceptance of abortion than did their French-speaking colleagues. In reference to the physician's role in the decision to abort, French physicians are more directive than North American physicians. Cultural predispositions may explain these differences in attitudes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
McKeownT.The Origins of Human Disease. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1988.
2.
RetsinasJ.The impact of prenatal technology upon attitudes towards disabled infants. Res. Sociol. Health Care9: 75–104, 1991.
3.
NewmanL. F.Historical and cross-cultural perspectives on abortion. In Psychiatric Aspects of Abortion, Issues in Psychiatry, edited by StotlandN. L., pp. 39–49. American Psychiatric Press, Washington, D.C., 1991.
4.
HoltzmanN. A.Proceed with Caution: Predicting Genetic Risks in the Recombinant DNA Era. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1989.
5.
McKusickV.Mendelian Inheritance in Man, Ed. 9. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1990.
6.
Genet. Pract.6(2), 1989.
7.
De WatcherM.L'indication médicale, travestissement de convictions morales? In Le diagnostic prénatal, Cahiers de Bioéthique 2, pp. 223–238. Les Presses de l'Université Laval, Québec, 1980.
8.
LippmanA.Prenatal diagnosis: Tough questions for all women. Curr. Ther., 1989, pp. 24–25.
9.
LippmanA.Prenatal genetic testing and screening: Constructing needs and reinforcing inequities. Am. J. Law Med. 17 (1 and 2): 15–50, 1991.
10.
FletcherJ. C.Ethics and human genetics: A cross-cultural perspective. In Ethics and Human Genetics: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited by WertzD. C.FletcherJ. C., pp. 457–490. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989.
11.
MoattiJ. P.Analyse coût-bénéfice du diagnostic prénatal des anomalies chromosomiques par amniocentèse. Rev. Epidemiol. Sante Publique38: 309–321, 1990.
12.
KuninsH.RosenfieldA.Abortion: A legal and public health perspective. Annu. Rev. Public Health12: 361–382, 1991.
13.
KnoppersB. M.Dignité humaine et patrimoine génétique. Commision de réforme du droit du Canada (Série Protection de la vie), Ottawa, 1991.
14.
MRC Vitamin Study Research Group. Prevention of neural tube defect: Results of the Medical Research Council Vitamin Study. Lancet338: 131–133, 1991.
15.
DusterT.Backdoor to Eugenics. Routledge, New York, 1990.
16.
WertzD. C.FletcherJ. C.Ethics and Human Genetics: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989.
17.
ImberJ.Abortion policy and medical practice. Society, July/August 1990, pp. 27–34.
18.
HenifinM. S.HubbardR.NorsigianJ.Prenatal screening. In Reproductive Laws for the 1990s: A Briefing Handbook, edited by TaubN.CohenN., pp. 129–154. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J., 1988.
19.
Comité sur l'application des dispositions législatives sur l'avortement. Rapport du comité Badgley. Approvisionnements et Services Canada, Ottawa, 1977.
20.
RenaudM.Diagnostic prénatal et choix de société: Le non-dit du développement technologique. In Innovations technologiques et décisions en santé publique, edited by MoattiJ. P.MawasC., pp. 203–220. La Documentation française, Paris, 1992.
21.
RenaudM.Is selective abortion for a genetic disease an issue for the medical profession? A comparative study of Quebec and France. Prenat. Diagn.13: 691–706, 1993.
22.
MattéiJ. F.Les retombées sociales du diagnostic prénatal: Expériences et interrogations du généticien. In Innovations technologiques et décisions en santé publique, edited by MoattiJ. P.MawasC., pp. 221–225. La Documentation française, Paris, 1992.
23.
RoyD. J.HallJ. G.Ethics and medical genetics in Canada. In Ethics and Human Genetics: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited by WertzD. C.FletcherJ. C., pp. 119–140. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989.
24.
GellerG.TamborE. S.PapiemikE.Attitudes toward abortion for fetal anomaly in the second vs third trimester: A survey of Parisian obstetricians. Prenat. Diagn.13: 707–722, 1993.
25.
MaroteauxP.Les practiciens face au diagnostic anténatal. Projet195, 1985.
26.
ChervenakF. A.When is termination of pregnancy during the third semester morally justifiable?N. Engl. J. Med.310(3): 501–504, 1984.
CarlosS.CloutierE.Les médecins québécois et l'avortement. Corporation professionnelle des médecins du Québec, Montréal, 1976.
29.
WeitzR.Barriers to acceptance of genetic counseling among primary care physicians. Soc. Biol.26(3): 189–197, 1979.
30.
BernhardtB. B.BannermanR. M.The influence of obstetricians on the utilization of amniocentesis. Prenat. Diagn.2: 115–121, 1982.
31.
Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies. Proceed with Care. Final report. Government of Canada, Ottawa, 1993.
32.
JulianC.Physicians' acceptability of termination of pregnancy after prenatal diagnosis in southern France. Prenat. Diagn.9(2): 77–89, 1989.
33.
WeismanC. S.Abortion attitudes and performance among male and female obstetrician-gynecologists. Fam. Plann. Perspect.18(2): 67–73, 1986.
34.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Report on ACOG Survey of Attitudes Toward Elective Abortions. Needham Porter Novelli, Washington, D.C., 1985.
35.
RaoR.Move to ban sex-determination. Nature324: 202, 1981.
36.
SorensonJ. R.SwazeyJ. P.ScotchN. A.Reproductive Pasts, Reproductive Futures: Genetic Counseling and its Effectiveness. Birth Defects Original Article Series 17, 4. Alan R. Liss, New York, 1981.
37.
ZolaI. K.Culte de la santé et méfaits de la médicalisation. In Médecine et Société. Les années 80, edited by BozziniL., pp. 31–51. Éditions Saint-Martin, Montréal, 1986.
38.
HarrisR.WertzD. C.Ethics and medical genetics in the United Kingdom. In Ethics and Human Genetics: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, edited by WertzD. C.FletcherJ. C., pp. 388–418. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989.
