Author Archives: Allie Janson Hazell

Building on our Strengths

road

Image Credit: Trey Ratcliffe (click image for link to original photo)

Why we are well poised for tomorrow

As part of a committee I recently joined, we were each asked to put together a list of strengths of the genetic counseling profession. Although I’ve written about this before, brainstorming for this project reminded me how incredibly relevant our strengths are in the context of the future direction of healthcare in North America. I thought I’d share a few of my ideas here:

  • Our focus on patient autonomy. There is a huge trend (at least in mainstream media) towards patient-centered care. This article from the New York Times last month is a prime example. It highlights the idea that patient’s no longer want to be told what to do, but are looking for a healthcare provider that will help educate them and involve them in their own healthcare decisions. Assisting patients in making informed decisions for themselves is one of the foundations upon which our profession is built. We are, by default, way ahead of other health professions in this respect.
  • Our focus on prevention. “Preventative medicine” is a buzz term these days, especially given Obama’s healthcare plan, that calls for the promotion of “smart preventative care, like cancer screening.” (This strength was highlighted recently in a list serv discussion.)
  • Our multidisciplinary perspective. Genes are not limited to a specific organ or body part. As the medical paradigm transitions from looking at patients as a series of “parts” (cardiology, nephrology, psychology) toward a more holistic approach, we are well poised to become active participants.

I believe that knowing one’s strengths and learning to capitalize on them is essential, which is one reason why I enjoyed this activity so much. I’m interested to hear others’ perceptions of the ones I’ve listed above, and ideas about how we can build on these strengths to ensure that we maximize our potential.

Leave a comment

Filed under Allie Janson Hazell

Guest Post: Gene Patents- Why should genetic counselors care?

By Ellen T. Matloff

Ellen T. Matloff, M.S. received a Bachelor of Science degree cum laude from Union College, and a Master’s in Genetic Counseling from Northwestern University. Ms. Matloff currently serves as the Director of Cancer Genetic Counseling at Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut and previously worked at SUNY Health Sciences Center in Syracuse, NY. She is board certified by the American Board of Genetic Counseling and is a member of the National Society of Genetic Counselors, the American Society of Human Genetics and the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Should we, as genetic counselors, care about gene patents?

We have plenty of other things to worry about: patient care, publication pressures, administrative responsibilities, growing caseloads, shrinking health care budgets (I could go on, but why raise our collective blood pressure?) — so why, oh why, would we add gene patents to this list?

Because gene patents have a major impact on many things that affect our practice. This includes, but is not limited to:

  • Cost of genetic testing, which influences: Patient access and insurability
  • Market competition, or lack thereof, which affects: Cost (see above), our ability as practitioners (or as a Society) to drive change within commercial genetic laboratories regarding issues such as price setting, marketing, advertising, turnaround time, reporting mechanisms, etc.
  • Clinical research, clinical research, clinical research. It is pretty hard to enroll patients in a study with an extra $3000 price tag per subject. Even a small study of 100 patients would cost more than $300,000 in genetic testing costs alone if patients were to receive their genetic testing results. And as those of us who have written grants know all too well, 100 subjects is a small ‘n’ and $300k is a huge chunk of most available grants.

In short, a strictly enforced patent creates a monopoly. Our patients need a test, we have to order it from one company, and they hold all of the cards. Lump it or leave it.

In the case of BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing, the cost of testing was $1600 in private laboratories in 1997. Twelve years later with the advent of more efficient and less expensive technology, the cost of the testing has not dropped, but soared: $3120 for full sequencing + an additional $650 for BART analysis = >$3770 per patient. Cha ching!

Perhaps in response to rising costs and direct-to-consumer advertising, many insurance companies have tightened their belts and their inclusion criteria for testing. HealthNet tried to drop coverage for genetic testing altogether two years ago, before an angry mob of rioters (also called genetic counselors) bled the story to the press. Medicare will now only pay for testing in a person who already has cancer. Kind of obliterates the whole preventive healthcare angle, doesn’t it?

For all of the above reasons, genetic counselors should care about gene patenting. This is important, its effects are far-reaching, and this is precedent-setting. Educate yourself and educate others.

———-

Here is a great clip about Myriad’s BRCA patent from the documentary film In the Family.

11 Comments

Filed under Guest Blogger

Guest Post: The “Wholistic” Genetic Counselor of Tomorrow

By Jordanna Joaquina

Jordanna is Director of Genetics and Co-Founder of AccessDNA.com, the first comprehensive online resource for information about hundreds of genetic conditions, topics, tests and Direct-to-Consumer providers. She is a board-certified genetic counselor with a clinical background in multiple disciplines of genetics. Read her complete bio here.

At the Consumer Genetics Conference last week in Boston, MA, most of the genetic “thought leaders” agreed that the technology was advancing quicker than the science. However, we all know that the personalizedmedicinescience will eventually catch up and sooner than we think, we will have made incredible strides. Not only will we identify and validate the genetic variables of disease, but also how they interact with each other, and with non-genetic factors, to affect disease risk and treatment.

And then what? What happens when personalized medicine is not just a crazy, pie-in-the-sky pipedream made up by forward-thinking, eccentric scientists, but a reality, and the new, “right way” to approach and practice medicine?

In this brave new world of personalized medicine, I imagine that every person will have their own personal genetic counselor. Along with primary care physicians or specialists, this new class of genetic counselors will help assess, interpret and guide patients through their risk factors, both genetic and non-genetic.

But if personalized medicine is realized tomorrow, little of us would be prepared to take on this important role – the “wholistic,” as I call it, genetic counselor who specializes in complex disease. Most of us have never even seen whole genome scanning nor whole genome sequencing results, nevermind being asked or expected to interpret them.

So, as genetic counselors, what can/should we do? How do we position ourselves as vital members of the personalized medicine team? How do we better educate and train ourselves and future genetic counselors in the genetics of complex disease as well as emerging genetic technologies? How do we participate in whole genome research, thought groups, and policy-making bodies? How do we continue to advocate for the proper use of genetic information and promote access to genetic services?

How do we begin to see our field and ourselves as one of the most important elements of health care in the next century?

1 Comment

Filed under Guest Blogger

When to take the debate public

I am an advocate for public thinking. In this era of social media, collaboration and transparency, there seems to be little benefit in keeping ideas to yourself and engaging only with those with similar backgrounds and viewpoints. By opening the conversation up to a larger audience, you can challenge yourself to consider others’ opinions and create a more dynamic and evolving dialogue.

I’ve always found the genetic counseling list serv an interesting phenomenon. From a clinical perspective it is a great tool to disseminate and receive info. But as a tool to discuss professional issues, media articles, political events, etc. I’ve always found it somewhat inadequate. Interesting debates and insights get lost in inboxes and archived folders. A blog, in my opinion, is a much more appropriate and user-friendly way to discuss and document these issues.

Then, about two weeks after the launch of DNA Exchange, Dr. Tiller was murdered. With indisputable relevancy for and impact on the genetic counseling community, it seemed obvious that this event should be addressed here. We asked Betsy Gettig to put some of her thoughts on paper, and I drafted a post.  But as I watched the discussion unfold on the list serv, with all of the uncensored expressions of grief, anger, confusion and hope, I reconsidered the utility of taking the discussion public at that particular point in time. With such an emotion laden and polarizing topic such as late-term abortion, adding a public element to an already difficult disucssion seemed excessive. As simple as it sounds, the experience taught me about the value of our profession’s private discussion list- namely the ability to discuss issues directly with other GCs, and only other GCs.

As some time has passed and I have had more time to digest my thoughts and feelings about Dr. Tiller’s death, I feel more comfortable discussing it online. I still may publish the drafted Dr. Tiller post at some point, and I know others are wanting to write on the topic as well. But for the time being, I am hoping to hear what you think about the benefits of private vs. public discussion of professional issues. What do you believe to be the strengths and drawbacks of this type of forum? What do you hope to see discussed here?

Leave a comment

Filed under Allie Janson Hazell

Open call for Guest Bloggers

Thank you to everyone who has provided feedback over the past week. The response to DNA Exchange has been great so far, and it is encouraging to know that the GC community is excited about participating in this venue. Please continue to provide your comments, both positive and constructive; we appreciate hearing your voice.

 

A chance to discuss your thoughts publicly

We have had several people inquiring about participating in this initiative. In the interest of diversity and openness, we’ve developed a “guest blogger” policy. For obvious reasons, this open call is limited to those intending to discuss genetics or genetic counseling related issues.

How it works:

  1. If you’re interested in contributing a post, leave a comment here or send me a note at alliejanson[at]gmail.com with the topic you’re hoping to discuss
  2. Once you’ve written your post, the core group here will review it (to ensure there is no breach in patient confidentiality, to maintain the integrity of the site etc)
  3. Your content will be published with a short bio under a “Guest Blogger” title

We hope this process will encourage those who:

  • are interested in blogging, but aren’t ready to make a permanent commitment to it
  • are intimidated by some of the technical aspects of contributing to a blog. There is no technical knowledge required

We would also love to include posts from some non-GCs, including physicians, researchers, health advocates, legal experts, patients. Or anyone with an opinion about genetics, really.

Look forward to hearing from you soon.

Photo credit

4 Comments

Filed under Allie Janson Hazell

Welcome to The DNA Exchange

Picture 5

Image credit: Walter Parenteau (click on image for link to original photo)

Over the past year or so, I’ve gotten to “know” the  incredibly vibrant  and active online genetics blogging community. These bloggers (made up of researchers, medical students, geneticists etc) are not only a great resource for up-to-date information, but also provide unique perspective on the implications of scientific advances on health care providers, patients and society.

The idea behind The DNA Exchange is to allow GCs to be more proactive, rather than reactive, with respect to public discourse on the web. The hope is that this centralized forum will encourage GCs to get involved and share their individual point of view.

In one of our profession’s most prominent teaching texts, the authors write:

Being a member of a relatively small profession that deals with issues at the cutting edge of science, medicine and ethics requires a commitment to continued growth and to the assumption of responsibility for helping other health professionals, policy makers, and clients understand genetics and its implications.

A Guide to Genetic Counseling (1998), Chapter 1, p. 18

The web provides us with an excellent opportunity to grow and contribute to a broader discussion. And I’d argue that we have as much to learn from other professionals and stakeholders as they do from us. Let the sharing begin.

(photo credit)

2 Comments

Filed under Allie Janson Hazell