Viewpoint

Resisting revolution: generalism and the new genetics

Most of the literature on pharmacogenetics assumes that the main problems in implementing the technology will be institutional ones (due to funding or regulation) and that although it involves genetic testing, the ethical issues involved in pharmacogenetics are different from, even less than, ‘traditional’ genetic testing. Very little attention has been paid to how clinicians will accept this technology, their attitudes towards it and how it will affect clinical practice.

This paper presents results from interviews with clinicians who are beginning to use pharmacogenetics and explores how they view the ethics of pharmacogenetic testing, its use to exclude some patients from treatment, and how this kind of testing fits into broader debates around genetics. In particular this paper examines the attitudes of breast cancer and Alzheimer’s disease specialists. The results of these interviews will be compared with the picture of pharmacogenetics painted in the published literature, as a way of rooting this somewhat speculative writing in clinical practice.

This study examines the responses of general practitioners (GPs) in Vic., Australia to an increased emphasis on genetics in primary care. A qualitative analysis of focus group interviews with GPs in regional and metropolitan areas and one focus group interview with genetics experts showed that despite the emphasis placed on genetics by the experts, GPs remained ambivalent to the routine integration of genetics into general practice. This response from GPs has been noted in several studies and is most commonly attributed to GPs’ lack of knowledge about genetics. In this study we argue that a ‘cognitive deficit’ understanding of the problem excludes many of the factors that GPs regard as important in relating genetics to primary care. We show that GPs’ ambivalence emerges from how they situate genetics within practices of patient care and in relation to what they regard as good patient management. We found that GPs respond most enthusiastically to genetics and genetic testing if they feel it changes their management in ways they consider of benefit to their patients. GPs have specialist skills in managing the heterogeneity of patient care and these skills enable them to situate genetics relative to the overall needs of patients. Preparing GPs to ‘do’ genetics when the need arises by finding ways to make genetics information available to them as the need arises would facilitate the integration of genetics as practices of primary care.