The publication of the ACMG recommendations has reignited the debate over predictive testing for adult-onset disorders in minors. Response has been polarized. With this in mind, we review and critically analyze this debate. First, we identify long-standing inconsistencies between consensus guidelines and clinical practice regarding risk assessment for adult-onset genetic disorders in children using family history and molecular analysis. Second, we discuss the disparate assumptions regarding the nature of whole genome and exome sequencing underlying arguments of both supporters and critics, and the role these assumptions play in the arguments for and against reporting. Third, we suggest that implicit differences regarding the definition of best interests of the child underlie disparate conclusions as to the best interests of children in this context. We conclude by calling for clarity and consensus concerning the central foci of this debate.
Keywords: DNA/ethics; child; genetic predisposition to disease; genetic testing/ethics; genetic testing/standards; genomics/ethics; genomics/standards; incidental findings; sequence analysis.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.