Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis - Hur fosterdiagnostiken representeras i en bedömning av Statens medicinsk-etiska råd.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate how the new Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis method (NIPD) is represented within a public policy constituted by The Swedish National Council on Medical Ethics, “SMER”. In order to do this, a post-structural method for policy-analysis called “What’s the problem represented to be”, founded by Carol Lee Bacchi (2009) have been used for the analysis. Through a discursive view, the chosen policy is seen as a process in which both problems and solutions are given shape. Hence, the process is assumed to create the conditions and boundaries of what might be said and thought about prenatal diagnosis and the method NIPD. Through the “What’s the problem represented to be” –perspective I have found that prenatal diagnosis (and NIPD) is represented as an individual problem of choice for the pregnant women. The purpose of prenatal diagnosis is then seen as giving the women opportunities to make more informed choices about their own offspring. This perspective seems to be based on knowledge’s that sees prenatal tests as a valuable activity that relieves suffering and anxiety among pregnant women. At the same time, there are risks, as the policy also represents NIPD as an abuse-problem. This is because of the not-likable consequence (abortion decision based on the “wrong” reasons) that is assumed can follow from the women’s use of the method. Underlying the discussion a conflict appears between the woman's free choice and the society's power and interference on that choice. Lastly it is concluded that even if prenatal diagnosis is assumed to be governed by specific goals and objectives, these aims seem on their turn be grounded in somewhat disorganized arguments.