Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Phase Changes in the BRCA Policy Domain

  • Philosophical Exploration
  • Published:
Journal of Religion and Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recent US Supreme Court ruling against gene patenting has been accompanied by the passage at the federal level of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, both events representing a thawing or phase change in policies that will now make preventive techniques, such as BRCA genetic testing to predict risk for familial breast and ovarian cancer, more affordable and accessible. Authors including Yun-Han Huang in this journal have noted the judicial ruling is one step—a significant one—in the process of patent system reform. This commentary links such changes with policy formation and action taken by members of diverse religious communities in the aftermath of the Human Genome Project and continuing in today’s genome sequencing area. Religious engagement has acted as a catalyzing force for change in the creation and dissemination of genetic developments. Religious perspectives are needed to solve the new ethical dilemmas posed by population screening for BRCA mutations and the rise of direct-to-consumer and provider marketing of such genetic tests, which have far-reaching consequences at the individual, family, and societal levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andre, J. (1992). Blocked exchanges: A taxonomy. Ethics, 103(1), 29–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, K., Micco, E., Carney, A., Stopfer, J., & Putt, M. (2005). Racial differences in the use of BRCA1/2 testing among women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(14), 1729–1736.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Atwood, K., Colditz, G. A., & Kawachi, I. (1997). From public health science to prevention policy: Placing science in its social and political contexts. American Journal of Public Health, 87(10), 1603–1606.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt-Rauf, S. I., Raveis, V. H., Drummond, N. F., Conte, J. A., & Rothman, S. M. (2006). Ashkenazi Jews and breast cancer: The consequences of linking ethnic identity to genetic disease. American Journal of Public Health, 96(11), 1979–1988.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Branson, H. (1992). Keynote address: Africa, African-Americans, and the origin of a universal ethic. In H. E. Flack & E. D. Pellegrino (Eds.), African-American perspectives on biomedical ethics (pp. 1–10). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, A. L., & Merz, J. (1996). Patenting gene sequences. BMJ, 312(7036), 926.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Caulfield, T., Cook-Deegan, R. M., Kieff, F. S., & Walsh, J. P. (2006). Evidence and anecdotes: An analysis of human gene patenting controversies. Nature Biotechnology, 24(9), 1091–1094.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheon, J., Baldwin, L., Maxson, K., Heaney, C., & Cook-Deegan, R. (2013). BRCA briefing page. Durham, NC: Duke Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy, Center for Genome Ethics, Law and Policy. http://genomicsforum.org/files/geno_report_WEB_w_RFI_112revv.pdf. Accessed 25 Dec 2013.

  • Cole-Turner, R. (1995). Religion and gene patenting. Science, 270(5233), 52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deane-Drummond, C. (2006). Genetic testing and screening. Genetics and Christian ethics (pp. 76–100). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, D. L. (2009). Genetic service delivery: The current system and its strengths and challenges. In: Institute of Medicine. Institute of Medicine roundtable on translating genomic-based research for health. Innovations in service delivery in the Age of Genomics: Workshop summary. (pp. 3–20). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • Eisenberg, D. (2007). Genetic screening for breast cancer genes. Jerusalem: Aish.com. http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/Genetic_Screening_for_Breast_Cancer_Genes.html. Accessed 16 Dec 2013.

  • Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered (FORCE). (2013). Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA): Coverage for genetic counseling and testing. Tampa, FL. http://www.facingourrisk.org/info_research/finding-health-care/financial-help/index.php. Accessed 21 Jan 2014.

  • Ferla, R., Calo, V., Cascio, S., Rinaldi, G., Badalamentil, G., Carreca, I., et al. (2007). Founder mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Annals of Oncology, 18, vi93–vi98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gold, E. R., & Carbone, J. (2010). Myriad Genetics: In the eye of the storm. Genetics in Medicine, 12(4 Suppl), S39–S70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, M. J. (2001). Religious voices in biotechnology: The case of gene patenting. In: Claiming power over life: Religion and biotechnology policy. (pp. 72–111). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

  • Hanson, M. J. (2002). Patenting genes and life: Improper commodification? In D. Magnus, A. Caplan, & G. McGee (Eds.), Who owns life? (pp. 161–174). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healthy People 2020 (HP2020). Genomics. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=15. Accessed 1 Jun 2012.

  • Heller, M. A., & Eisenberg, R. S. (1998). Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science, 280(5364), 698–701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Y.-H. (2013). Gene patents: A broken incentives system. Journal of Religion and Health, 52(4), 1079–1084. doi:10.1007/s10943-013-9758-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liptak, A. (2013). Justices, 9-0, bar patenting human genes. New York Times, 14 Jun 2013, A1, A16.

  • Marchione, M. (2013). BRCA1 and BRCA2: Court ruling against gene patents may open breast cancer tests to more women. Huffington Post, Jun 14, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/06/13/brca1-and-brca2_n_3436607.html. Accessed 14 Jun 2013.

  • Milbank, D. (2013). Justices simplify science with lab bats. Washington Post, 16 Apr 2013, A2.

  • Modell, S. M. (2007). Genetic and reproductive technologies in the light of religious dialogue. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, 42(1), 163–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modell, S. M., Citrin, T., King, S. B., & Kardia, S. L. R. (2014). The role of religious values in decisions about genetics and the public’s health. Journal of Religion and Health doi:10.1007/s10943-013-9814-y.

  • Modell, S. M., King, S. B., & Platt, J. E. (2008). Parallel tracks in two faith-based genetic dialogue groups in the state of Michigan: Public health convergences. 136th Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association, San Diego, CA, 28 Oct 2008. https://apha.confex.com/apha/136am/webprogram/Paper174404.html. Accessed 24 Jan 2014.

  • Mor, P., & Oberle, K. (2008). Ethical issues related to BRCA gene testing in Orthodox Jewish women. Nursing Ethics, 15(4), 512–522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Churches USA (NCC). (2006). Fearfully and wonderfully made: A policy on human biotechnologies. Washington, DC: National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. http://www.ncccusa.org/pdfs/BioTechPolicy.pdf. Accessed 24 Jan 2014.

  • Nelson, J. R. (1994). Official religious positions. In: On the new frontiers of genetics and religion. (pp. 171-205). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

  • Parthasarathy, S. (2014). Co-producing knowledge and political legitimacy: Comparing life form patent controversies in Europe and the United States. In R. Hagendijk, S. Hilgartner, & C. Miller (Eds.), Science and democracy: Emerging trends. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prouser, N. (2000). Case report: Genetic susceptibility testing for breast and ovarian cancer: A patient’s perspective. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 9(2), 153–159.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rabin, R. C. (2013). In Israel, a push to screen for cancer gene leaves many conflicted. New York Times, 27 Nov 2013, A1, A10.

  • Resnik, D. B. (2001). DNA patents and human dignity. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 29(2), 152–165.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, J., & Mason, C. E. (2013). Pervasive sequence patents cover the entire human genome. Genome Medicine, 5(3), 27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosner, F. (1991). Modern medicine and Jewish ethics (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Yeshiva University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suther, S., & Kiros, G. E. (2009). Barriers to the use of genetic testing: a study of racial and ethnic disparities. Genetics in Medicine, 11(9), 655–662.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Health and Human Services (U.S. HHS). (2013). Preventive services covered under the Affordable Care Act. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/factsheets/2010/07/preventive-services-list.html#PAGE_4. Accessed 29 Jan 2014.

  • US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). (2005). Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: Recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 143(5), 355–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooten, M. D. (2012). Distributive justice and Christian health care ethics: A proposed model based on a review of the literature. In A. M. Curtis & D. P. Werthel (Eds.), Religion and healthcare (pp. 1–12). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Stephen M. Modell, Susan B. King & Sharon L. R. Kardia

  2. Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Stephen M. Modell & Toby Citrin

  3. Center for Public Health and Community Genomics, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 4605 SPH Tower, 1415 Washington Hts., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA

    Stephen M. Modell

Authors
  1. Stephen M. Modell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan B. King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Toby Citrin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sharon L. R. Kardia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen M. Modell.

Additional information

See related articles by Huang, Y.-H. (2013). Gene patents: A broken incentives system. Journal of Religion and Health, 52, 1079–1084, doi:10.1007/s10943-013-9758-2 and Modell, S. M., Citrin, T., King, S. B., & Kardia, S. L. R. (2014). The role of religious values in decisions about genetics and the public's health. Journal of Religion and Health, doi:10.1007/s10943-013-9814-y.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Modell, S.M., King, S.B., Citrin, T. et al. Phase Changes in the BRCA Policy Domain. J Relig Health 53, 715–724 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-014-9836-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-014-9836-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation