Historically in cancer genetic counseling, when a pathogenic variant is found which explains the cancers in the family, at risk family members are offered site‐specific testing to identify whether or not they have the previously identified pathogenic variant. Factors such as turnaround times, cost, and insurance coverage all made site‐specific testing the most appropriate testing option; however, as turnaround times and costs have substantially dropped and the recognition of double heterozygous families and families with nontraditional presentations has increased, the utility of site‐specific testing should be questioned. We present four cases where ordering site‐specific testing would have missed a clinically relevant pathogenic variant which raises the question of whether or not site‐specific testing should be regularly used in cancer genetic testing.

International students have unique personal and academic challenges during their training in genetic counseling programs across the United States (U.S.). Previous research has explored their motivations and experiences; however, there is scant research on how their international status affects the post-graduate experience. The current study used semi-structured phone interviews to explore the professional issues that international students face throughout their educational and professional careers. Twenty-six participants were interviewed including international genetic counseling students in their second years of training and international genetic counselors who graduated from a U.S.-accredited program. Participants included six, second-year students, twelve genetic counselors employed in the U.S., six employed in Canada, and one employed in the United Kingdom (U.K.). Qualitative analysis of interviews captured the common experiences and challenges international students faced during their training and post-graduation. Participants stated that they applied to programs in the U.S. because there is wide transferability of qualifications across the world, and there is limited or no opportunities for masters level genetic counseling training in their home country. Most participants who had applied for jobs in the U.S. experienced difficulties regarding unfamiliarity of human resources (HR) departments and Border Control Officers with international genetic counselors (GCs) and their visa requirements. The results suggest that currently there are insufficient job resources tailored to international genetic counselors, and an inadequate availability of peer support. The results also speak to the need to develop resources for prospective international students and for international GCs seeking jobs, and establishment of a peer support network. These resources may also provide assistance to genetic counseling training programs and employers to address the challenges faced by international genetic counselors.