Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Returning a Research Participant's Genomic Results to Relatives: Analysis and Recommendations

  • Susan M. Wolf
  • , Rebecca Branum
  • , Barbara A. Koenig
  • , Gloria M. Petersen
  • , Susan A. Berry
  • , Laura M. Beskow
  • , Mary B. Daly
  • , Conrad V. Fernandez
  • , Robert C. Green
  • , Bonnie S. Leroy
  • , Noralane M. Lindor
  • , P. Pearl O'Rourke
  • , Carmen Radecki Breitkopf
  • , Mark A. Rothstein
  • , Brian Van Ness
  • , Benjamin S. Wilfond
  • University of Minnesota Twin Cities
  • Uni. of Minnesota's
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science
  • American Academy of Pediatrics
  • Duke University
  • Iowa State University
  • Boston University
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Dalhousie University
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital
  • Mayo Clinic Arizona
  • University of Minnesota
  • Wake Forest University
  • Partners HealthCare
  • Yale University
  • SUNY Albany
  • University of Louisville
  • Seattle Children's Hospital
  • Division of Bioethics
  • University of Washington

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

93 Scopus citations

Abstract

Genomic research results and incidental findings with health implications for a research participant are of potential interest not only to the participant, but also to the participant's family. Yet investigators lack guidance on return of results to relatives, including after the participant's death. In this paper, a national working group offers consensus analysis and recommendations, including an ethical framework to guide investigators in managing this challenging issue, before and after the participant's death.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)440-463
Number of pages24
JournalJournal of Law, Medicine and Ethics
Volume43
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2015

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Returning a Research Participant's Genomic Results to Relatives: Analysis and Recommendations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this