Ethics debate over blood from newborn safety tests

February 8, 2010 By LAURAN NEERGAARD , AP Medical Writer
A one-day-old baby boy's heel is pricked for blood during a phenylketonuria (PKU) test at Washington Hospital Center in Washington, Friday, Feb. 5, 2010. A critical safety net for babies _ that heelprick of blood taken from every newborn _ is facing an ethics attack. States increasingly are storing the leftover blood samples for later medical research, often without parents' knowledge or consent _ prompting lawsuits in two states and work in many others to give parents a greater say. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

(AP) -- A critical safety net for babies - that heelprick of blood taken from every newborn - is facing an ethics attack.

After those tiny blood spots are tested for a list of devastating diseases, some states are storing them for years. Scientists consider the leftover samples a treasure, both to improve and to study bigger questions, like which can harm a fetus' developing heart or which genes trigger childhood cancers.

But seldom are parents asked to consent to such research - most probably don't know it occurs - raising privacy concerns that are shaking up one of public health's most successful programs. Texas is poised to throw away blood samples from more than 5 million babies to settle a lawsuit from parents angry at what they call secret DNA warehousing. A judge recently dismissed a similar lawsuit in Minnesota.

Michigan just moved 4 million leftover blood spots into a new "BioTrust for Health," planning a public education campaign about the research potential and how families can opt out.

Advisers to the U.S. government hope to have national recommendations by spring on how to assure all babies still get their newborn tests while allowing parents more say in what happens next.

"It's a critical thing that we take action," says advisory board member Sharon Terry of the nonprofit Genetic Alliance. She says distrust over the leftover blood spots threatens public confidence in newborn screening itself.

"The sunshine on the information - educating parents - is the way lesser threat. Done well and done right, there will be an enormous benefit overall to the system," she says.

Newborn screening isn't new. It began in the 1960s, and today every baby is supposed to be tested for at least 29 rare genetic diseases in hopes of catching the fraction who need early treatment to help avoid or death. Now being added to the list: Bubble-boy disease, formally known as SCID for severe combined immune deficiency.

The program catches about 5,000 babies a year in need of treatment.

Because newborn screening is mandatory, only a handful of states provide much upfront parent education. Leftover spots mainly are used for double-checking that newborn tests are accurate. Sometimes, families ask geneticists to study them after a child's death from a disease doctors can't immediately diagnose.

But as scientists sought to use the leftovers for broader research, suddenly the informing of parents - especially about long-stored spots - became an issue. While blood spots are stripped of identifying information before being handed over to scientists, people generally need to consent to participate in research.

"My kid is not a lab rat. You have to ask before you can use him in an experiment, before you can use his blood, his tissues, his DNA, whatever," says Andrea Beleno of Austin, one of the Texas parents who sued. Among their worries: that genetic information about the children could fall into the wrong hands.

Had she only been asked, Beleno adds, she probably would have let her son's blood spot be stored.

To scientists who pore through dusty warehouses in search of blood samples stored by health department ID codes - not the babies' names - privacy concerns are exaggerated.

"There's a gap between the name and the DNA. ... There's no way one could just put one's hands on these blood spots and know anything about that person," says Dr. Christopher Loffredo of Georgetown University, who needed families' permission to cull about 1,200 blood spots stored in Maryland for a study that linked a pregnant woman's smoking or exposure to certain chemical solvents to fetal heart defects.

Still, Dr. Jennifer Puck of the University of California, San Francisco, who created the new SCID test using leftover blood spots, understands parents' concerns.

"DNA is your personal signature, and it uniquely identifies us," Puck says. "We all have to become more careful and more specific in terms of what we're going to do with the blood spots."

Bioethicist Aaron Goldenberg of Case Western Reserve University studied parent attitudes, and found three-quarters would be willing to have their baby's leftover blood spot used for research if they were asked first. But they generally oppose that research without consent.

The balancing act for states, he says, is separating the two issues - lifesaving newborn screening and other use of the leftover blood - in the little time available to educate parents.

Michigan has posted opt-out forms on a Web site and rolls them out in hospitals starting next month. The state points out safeguards, including that the blood spots can't be subpoenaed for law enforcement purposes.

Texas - which soon will discard blood spots stored since 2002 rather than tracking down families for consent - now seeks parental permission to store leftovers. It has requests to destroy about 13,772 children's blood spots out of about 400,000 births since last May, says health department spokeswoman Carrie Williams.

Jana Monaco of Woodbridge, Va., fears Texas' move could mean throwing out "information that might save a baby's life one day."

She has a 12-year-old son severely brain-damaged from a metabolic disorder that wasn't part of screening when he was born - and a 7-year-old daughter diagnosed early who stays healthy with a special diet.

"People put more information obtainable about their own personal lives out on Facebook and MySpace than from their little blood spots," she says. She urges better public information "to really calm this issue."

Explore further: States expand newborn screening for life-threatening disorders


Related Stories

Survey: Ask permission to use newborn data, parents say

July 15, 2009

More than three-quarters of parents would be willing to permit the use of their children's newborn screening samples for research purposes if their permission were obtained beforehand, a University of Michigan survey shows.

Researchers use newborn blood data to study cerebral palsy

September 1, 2009

A statewide team of researchers led by a Michigan State University epidemiologist are hoping Michigan's archive of newborn blood spots will help them uncover the causes of cerebral palsy, the most common disabling motor disorder ...

Hunting newborn tests for super-rare gene diseases

January 4, 2010

(AP) -- At his first birthday, John Klor couldn't sit up on his own. A few months later, he was cruising like any healthy toddler - thanks to a special diet that's treating the North Carolina boy's mysterious disease.

Recommended for you

How the finch changes its tune

August 3, 2015

Like top musicians, songbirds train from a young age to weed out errors and trim variability from their songs, ultimately becoming consistent and reliable performers. But as with human musicians, even the best are not machines. ...

Cow embryos reveal new type of chromosome chimera

May 27, 2016

I've often wondered what happens between the time an egg is fertilized and the time the ball of cells that it becomes nestles into the uterine lining. It's a period that we know very little about, a black box of developmental ...

Shaving time to test antidotes for nerve agents

February 29, 2016

Imagine you wanted to know how much energy it took to bike up a mountain, but couldn't finish the ride to the peak yourself. So, to get the total energy required, you and a team of friends strap energy meters to your bikes ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

5 / 5 (1) Feb 08, 2010
unreal, those parents shouldn't even be allowed to have kids.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.