Article published In: Argumentation and Health
Edited by Sara Rubinelli and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 1:1] 2012
► pp. 113–129
Argumentation and risk communication about genetic testing
Challenges for healthcare consumers and implications for computer systems
Published online: 27 February 2012
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.1.1.09gre
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.1.1.09gre
As genetic testing for the presence of potentially health-affecting mutations becomes available for more genetic conditions, many people will soon be faced with the decision of whether or not to have a genetic test. Making an informed decision requires an understanding and evaluation of the arguments for and against having the test. As a case in point, this paper considers argumentation involving the decision of whether to have a BRCA gene test, one of the first commercially available genetic tests. First, argumentation in a five-page patient brochure from a for-profit company that provides BRCA gene testing, is analyzed. Next, for comparison, argumentation on BRCA testing in materials for healthcare consumers written by a not-for-profit health plan and a government organization, is analyzed. In view of the challenges identified by considering these examples, this article discusses how argumentation-oriented computer systems may be able to help the healthcare consumer to make informed decisions about genetic testing.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Gladkova, Olga L., Chrysanne DiMarco & Randy Allen Harris
Green, Nancy L.
Green, Nancy L.
2017. Roosmaryn Pilgram (2015). A Doctor’s Argument by Authority
. Journal of Argumentation in Context 6:2 ► pp. 271 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
