Non-invasive prenatal testing in Germany: a unique ethical and policy landscape

Women's wellbeing as an empty declaration? A qualitative exploration of challenges in accessing termination of pregnancy due to fetal anomaly in Germany

BACKGROUND

The provision of prenatal testing through publicly funded healthcare systems, including non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), is frequently justified on the basis of supporting reproductive autonomy and informed choice. This includes decision-making around termination of pregnancy (TOP), including where it is due to a diagnosis of fetal anomaly (TOPFA). In Germany, TOP is regulated under the criminal code. However, it is exempt from punishment, if provided upon request from the woman up to 12 weeks after conception (14 weeks gestation) and following mandatory counselling. After this gestational stage, TOP may be provided where it is necessary to ensure the physical and mental wellbeing of the pregnant woman. However, there is a significant lack of clarity about how to interpret and apply this criterion. Fetal anomaly is often detected or confirmed after the time limit for TOP upon request has passed, which introduces uncertainty whether a fetal indication justifies legal access to TOP.

METHODS

This study explores attitudes towards TOP, experiences with decision-making and access, and the implications of the German legal and regulatory frameworks. It draws on a qualitative semi-structured interview study, conducted between 2021 and 2022. Participants were 20 German professionals who have experience or expertise regarding the provision of NIPT, as well as 7 women with experiences of pregnancy, reproductive decision-making and the offer of NIPT. Interviews were conducted in German, and then transcribed, translated, and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants explored the importance of being able to access TOPFA; how the social positioning of TOP as a taboo procedure creates practical and psychosocial barriers to TOPFA access; the tension of who ultimately gets to make the decision about whether TOP can be provided; and how gestational time limits create emotional stress, frustrating informed decision-making and reproductive autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight that where prenatal testing is provided in the absence of guaranteed access to TOP, women's wellbeing becomes an empty declaration in German healthcare policy.

Negotiating severity behind the scenes: prenatal testing in Germany

Foetal-related severity is a key concept in policy and legislation relating to access to both reproductive technologies and selective abortions in many countries around the world, but not in Germany. This study sheds light on how 'severity' in the context of prenatal testing is understood and negotiated within the particular socio-cultural and legal context of Germany, where 'severity' relating to foetal clinical findings neither counts as a justification to implement population prenatal screening programs, nor as a legal ground to terminate pregnancy. This study explores the views of women who undergo prenatal testing, as well as of professionals who encounter them, through semi-structured interviews. It showcases how they frame severity and questions whether the existing legal and regulatory framework relating to prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy addresses their concerns and needs regarding reproductive decision-making. The interviews (n = 27) reveal that despite it being legally outside the explicit reasons for testing and termination of pregnancy, both women and professionals negotiate severity behind the scenes. Their interpretation of severity is highly context-dependent and relies on clinical, social and familial facets. Their perceptions of severity guide them in their handling of and decision-making around pregnancy management. Acknowledging the personal nature of severity assessment and providing professional or legal guidance which explicitly mentions foetal anomaly as a legitimate factor in pregnancy management could provide healthcare professionals and patients with the room needed to manage the pregnancy favourably.

Parents' mental health after termination of pregnancy for foetal anomaly - a systematic review

AIMS/BACKGROUND

Terminating a desired pregnancy due to foetal anomalies has been linked to significant distress. It is however less clear what long-term psychological implications the parents face in the aftermath. This systematic review aimed to explore the mental health outcomes of parents after the termination of pregnancy due to foetal anomaly (TOPFA) after gestational week 12 + 0.

DESIGN/METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines and using the PEO (Problem, Exposure, Outcome) framework, we conducted a comprehensive search across six electronic databases. The search was restricted to English studies published since 2000. Eligible studies provided quantitative assessments of mental health outcomes post-TOPFA. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Given the heterogeneity in outcome measures, the findings were synthesised narratively.

RESULTS

Of the 2261 papers identified, 11 studies (four cross-sectional and seven cohort studies) were included. Results demonstrated variations in symptoms of trauma-related stress, depressive symptoms, and grief reactions across the different studies post-TOPFA. Variations were found to be related to time since TOPFA and the difference in assessment tools used. Factors investigated as predictors of mental health outcomes, including gestational age, educational level, and religion, showed inconsistent findings, though partner support consistently correlated with lower levels of grief. Male partners, included in two studies, generally reported fewer symptoms of psychological distress.

CONCLUSION

This review explores a range of mental health outcomes and highlights the need for better quality studies that consider the psychological impact of TOPFA on partners. Further, this systematic review stresses the need of standardisation in measurement tools for assessing mental health symptoms.

Disparities in integrating non-invasive prenatal testing into antenatal healthcare in Australia: a survey of healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been clinically available in Australia on a user-pays basis since 2012. There are numerous providers, with available tests ranging from targeted NIPT (only trisomies 21, 18, and 13 +/- sex chromosome aneuploidy) to genome-wide NIPT. While NIPT is being implemented in the public health care systems of other countries, in Australia, the implementation of NIPT has proceeded without public funding. The aim of this study was to investigate how NIPT has been integrated into antenatal care across Australia and reveal the successes and challenges in its implementation in this context.

METHODS

An anonymous online survey was conducted from September to October 2022. Invitations to participate were sent to healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the provision of NIPT in Australia through professional society mailing lists and networks. Participants were asked questions on their knowledge of NIPT, delivery of NIPT, and post-test management of results.

RESULTS

A total of 475 HCPs responded, comprising 232 (48.8%) obstetricians, 167 (35.2%) general practitioners, 32 (6.7%) midwives, and 44 (9.3%) genetic specialists. NIPT was most commonly offered as a first-tier test, with most HCPs (n = 279; 60.3%) offering it to patients as a choice between NIPT and combined first-trimester screening. Fifty-three percent (n = 245) of respondents always offered patients a choice between NIPT for the common autosomal trisomies and expanded (including genome-wide) NIPT. This choice was understood as supporting patient autonomy and informed consent. Cost was seen as a major barrier to access to NIPT, for both targeted and expanded tests. Equitable access, increasing time demands on HCPs, and staying up to date with advances were frequently reported as major challenges in delivering NIPT.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate substantial variation in the clinical implementation of NIPT in Australia, including in the offers of expanded screening options. After a decade of clinical use, Australian clinicians still report ongoing challenges in the clinical and equitable provision of NIPT.

Supporting patient decision-making in non-invasive prenatal testing: a comparative study of professional values and practices in England and France

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), which can screen for aneuploidies such as trisomy 21, is being implemented in several public healthcare systems across Europe. Comprehensive communication and information have been highlighted in the literature as important elements in supporting women's reproductive decision-making and addressing relevant ethical concerns such as routinisation. Countries such as England and France are adopting broadly similar implementation models, offering NIPT for pregnancies with high aneuploidy probability. However, we do not have a deeper understanding of how professionals' counselling values and practices may differ between these contexts.

METHODS

In this paper, we explore how professionals in England and France support patient decision-making in the provision of NIPT and critically compare professional practices and values. We draw on data from semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

Both English and French professionals emphasised values relating to patient choice and consent. However, understandings and application of these values into the practice of NIPT provision differed. English interviewees placed a stronger emphasis on interpreting and describing the process of counselling patients and clinical care through a "principle" lens. Their focus was on non-directiveness, standardisation, and the healthcare professional as "decision-facilitator" for patients. French interviewees described their approach through a "procedural" lens. Their focus was on formal consent, information, and the healthcare professional as "information-giver". Both English and French professionals indicated that insufficient resources were a key barrier in effectively translating their values into practice.

CONCLUSION

Our findings illustrate that supporting patient choice in the provision of NIPT may be held as an important value in common on a surface level, but can be understood and translated into practice in different ways. Our findings can guide further research and beneficially inform practice and policy around NIPT provision.

Mapping ethical, legal, & social implications (ELSI) of assisted reproductive technologies

PURPOSE

A significant portion of the research on assisted reproductive technologies explores ethical, legal, and social implications. It has an impact on social perceptions, the evolution of norms of clinical practices, regulations and public funding. This paper reviews and maps the geographical distribution to test the hypothesis of geographical concentration and classifies the output by fields and topics.

METHODS

We queried PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science for documents published between 1999 and 2019, excluding clinical trials and medical case reports. Documents were analyzed according to their titles, abstracts and keywords and were classified to assisted reproductive fields and by Topic Modeling. We analyzed geographic distribution.

RESULTS

Research output increased nearly tenfold. We show a trend towards decentralization of research, although at a slower rate compared with clinical assisted reproduction research. While the U.S. and the U.K.'s share has dropped, North America and Western Europe are still responsible for more than 70%, while China and Japan had limited participation in the global discussion. Fertility preservation and surrogacy have emerged as the most researched categories, while research about genetics was less prominent.

CONCLUSIONS

We call to enrich researchers' perspectives by addressing local issues in ways that are tailored to local cultural values, social and economic contexts, and differently structured healthcare systems. Researchers from wealthy centers should conduct international research, focusing on less explored regions and topics. More research on financial issues and access is required, especially regarding regions with limited public funding.

Change in client choice under multiple prenatal genetic testing options including noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) after genetic counseling in a Japanese maternity hospital

OBJECTIVE

This study examined how clients' selection and preference for noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy changed with genetic counseling (GC) performed by certified geneticists at a primary hospital specializing in obstetrics, where other multiple prenatal genetic tests options were available.

METHODS

A total of 334 couples who underwent GC between 2017 and 2019 were included in the study. The average age of the pregnant women who underwent GC was 35.1 years.

RESULTS

Among the 95 couples (28.4%) who wanted NIPT at the start of GC, 10 (10.5%) switched to other tests, and 4 (4.2%) chose not to undergo any test. Among the 106 (31.7%) couples who wanted the combination of ultrasonography and the serum marker test, 12 (11.3%) chose not to undergo the test. Among the 92 (27.5%) couples who were undecided before GC, 21 (22.8%) wanted NIPT, 31 (33.7%) selected combined tests, and 18 (19.6%) did not undergo any test.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated the significance of GC before prenatal genetic testing under widespread use of NIPT. Ideally, obstetric facilities should provide GC, or at least, pre-counseling at their own facilities, and offer multiple prenatal genetic testing options or refer to other facilities for the same.