How the “control-fate continuum” helps explain the genetic testing decision-making process: a grounded theory study

7Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Genetic testing decision-making for cancer predisposition is inherently complex. Understanding the mechanisms and influencing factors of the decision-making process is essential for genetic counselling and has not yet been investigated in Switzerland. This study’s aim is thus to provide a theory about the individual’s decision-making process regarding genetic testing for cancer predispositions in order to provide medical geneticists and genetic counsellors with insights into the needs and expectations of counsellees. We interviewed at-risk individuals who underwent genetic counselling in a clinical setting in Switzerland, using a grounded theory approach. Based on the interview data, we propose that a control-fate continuum, which is part of the individuals’ life philosophy, importantly influences the decision-making process. Those in need for control decide differently compared with those leaving their future to fate. Several psychosocial factors influence the position on the control-fate continuum: “looking for certainty”; “anticipating consequences”; “being socially influenced”; “simplifying risks”; and “deciding intuitively vs reflectively”. The control-fate continuum theory gives insights into the possible reasons behind decision-making regarding genetic testing for cancer predispositions. It includes both acceptors and decliners of genetic testing. Our theory helps healthcare professionals offering genetic counselling to anticipate problems within at-risk families and adapting their services to people’s needs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zimmermann, B. M., Shaw, D., Heinimann, K., Knabben, L., Elger, B., & Koné, I. (2020). How the “control-fate continuum” helps explain the genetic testing decision-making process: a grounded theory study. European Journal of Human Genetics, 28(8), 1010–1019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0602-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free