Non‐invasive prenatal testing: clinical utility and ethical concerns about recent advances

Joseph Thomas, James Harraway and David Kirchhoffer
Med J Aust 2021; 215 (8): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.51279
Published online: 18 October 2021

In reply: We thank Liley et al1 and McLean and Wu2 for their interest in our article.3 We agree that other areas of medicine share similar ethical challenges to those we outlined about non‐invasive prenatal test (NIPT) and non‐invasive prenatal screen (NIPS) regarding consent. However, we believe that the clinical utility and ethical challenges of genetic testing in the prenatal context are different to the paediatric and adult patients, where pathology exists or where screening is done for a specific pathology.

  • Joseph Thomas1
  • James Harraway2
  • David Kirchhoffer3

  • 1 Mater Health, Brisbane, QLD
  • 2 Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology, Brisbane, QLD
  • 3 Queensland Bioethics Centre, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, QLD


Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.