|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COMMENTARY |
The authors are with the Institute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, and serve on the Genetic Services Policy Project team, a collaboration between the University of Washington and the Washington State Department of Health, Genetic Services Section. Carolyn Watts is also with the Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. Carolyn Watts, Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Box 357660, Seattle, WA 98195 (e-mail: watts{at}u.washington.edu).
States include genetics services among their public health programs, but budget shortfalls raise the question, is genetics an essential part of public health? We used the Essential Services of Public Health consensus statement and data from state genetics plans to analyze states public health genetics programs.
Public health genetics programs fulfill public health obligations: birth defects surveillance and prevention programs protect against environmental hazards, newborn screening programs prevent injuries, and clinical genetics programs ensure the quality and accessibility of health services. These programs fulfill obligations by providing 4 essential public health services, and they could direct future efforts toward privacy policies, research on communications, and rigorous evaluations.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |