These bioethical reflections review the comparative arguments surrounding specific responsibilities raised by prenatal diagnosis: i) in the face of a risk pregnancy, attested by precise medical documentation, should recourse to prenatal diagnosis figure as a moral obligation or, conversely, is unconditional acceptance of the child incompatible with all prior “quality control”? (parental responsibility) ii) if so, does the final decision rest with the parents, and is a completely neutral attitude by the doctor justified even when the foetus has a complaint for which adequate forms of treatment are available? (medical and professional responsibility) iii) is it right to promote health campaigns introducing compulsory screening for risk categories with the prospect of automatically selecting out foetuses bearing genetic anomalies? (social responsibility). After analysis and discussion of the conflicting arguments over responsible management of prenatal diagnosis, there is a review of the stages through which the diagnostic process passes when a couple go for prenatal diagnosis under the shadow of a risk pregnancy. The aim is to assess the role that may be played by specific ethically-oriented support within the counselling process. For such support to be properly framed, the following suggestions are made: i)
Research article
Towards Responsible Management of Prenatal Diagnosis: Arguments for and against
C. Viafora
Abstract

