Scenario
Al and Marsha Jones, new parents of a seemingly healthy baby boy, are surprised when their doctor calls a few days after bringing him home. He asks them both to come in for further tests. At the visit, the doctor explains that a routine newborn blood test suggests the baby may have a genetic disorder called phenylketonuria (PKU), though more testing is needed. He reassures them that treatment is available, even though neither parent has heard of the condition before.
Arguments For and Against Parental Refusal of Newborn Screening
Arguments Supporting Parental Right to Refuse
The debate on newborn screening presents two contrasting perspectives. Advocates for compulsory screening stress its significance in identifying and treating hereditary conditions early on. They contend that parental consent should not be optional, as opting out could endanger the child’s health (Ulph et al., 2020). Many countries have legal requirements enforcing newborn screening as a precautionary public health initiative. The medical field’s ethical principles also back the notion of prioritizing a patient’s welfare, which supports the necessity for obligatory screening.
Arguments Against Parental Right to Refuse
Conversely, those against compulsory newborn screening believe in upholding the parents’ choice to decline, citing respect for their autonomy and the potential for rights violations. Concerns about the repercussions of false positives and avoidable medical procedures are also raised. Nevertheless, the prevailing legal standards favor the infant’s health over parental choice. Ethically, the medical responsibility to foster benevolence and avoid harm bolsters the case for required screening to avert danger to the child (Fremgen, 2020).
Personal Opinion on Parental Right to Refuse Newborn Screening
Parents should not be able to decline newborn screening due to the significant advantages it offers in recognizing and managing genetic disorders, which surpass parental autonomy issues. As guardians, we must look after our children’s health, with newborn screening a vital tool in this endeavor. If faced with the decision as Al or Marsha Jones, it would be wise to heed medical advice and agree to further testing for their son to secure the best care possible.
Screening for Untreatable Diseases: Ethical Considerations
Even in the absence of a cure, screening for conditions is still justifiable. Early detection can provide critical insights for handling the condition and preparing the family for upcoming challenges. It may also enable early interventions to enhance the child’s quality of life. Ultimately, while the debate has legitimate points on both sides, the advantages of newborn screening for the child’s health and future should take precedence over parental autonomy, with decisions made in the child’s best interest.
References
Fremgen, B. F. (2020). Medical law and ethics. Pearson.
Ulph, F., Dharni, N., Bennett, R., & Lavender, T. (2020). Consent for newborn screening: screening professionals’ and parents’ views. Public Health, 178, 151-158.