PATIENT AUTONOMY Respecting patient autonomy is dominant to nondirective counseling. It has no requirement to value-neutrality. The counselor’s values are expressed to undermine patients’ ability to make decisions for them. Autonomy respect in genetic counseling requires no greater circumspection about values than in any other counseling in health care (Robert Wachbroit & David Wasserman, 1995). Value neutrality is argued to be neither possible nor desirable but arises from conceptions of fewer objectives and less suitable values for public discourse. Nondirectiveness requires the counselor to adopt the most effective methods in ensuring that the choices of the patients about genetic testing are well informed and voluntary. Patients should be made to understand and appropriately respond to the results of genetic tests and diagnoses. The nondirective approach stipulates that the appropriate response is the one from the patient herself as long as it results from the fact that she understands the facts and reflects her values truly. Nondirective genetic counseling ensures that patients are well aware of genetic risks and their freedom of choosing whether or not to go for testing and ways of responding to positive test results. This is the respect for patient autonomy. On the contrary, value neutrality …show more content…
Decisions made by patients with respect to genetic testing have important consequences. These decisions may also, to some extent, test and help define the most central values of a patient. Making a decision about unconditional love to a retarded child and effectively nurturing that decision is quite difficult for any patient. Respecting the autonomy of such a patient is a daunting task, not because the autonomy is fragile or under threat, but because the decision will touch upon some of the deepest values in her (Robert Wachbroit & David Wasserman,