The debates about GIFs exist, at least in part, because of the immature state of the science. At present, the ability to interpret genomic variants is limited, given the state of knowledge about the full spectrum of genotype-phenotype correlations.18,19 As we learn more about these correlations and develop increasingly refined tools to assess genetic variants, it will be more straightforward to identify, interpret, and act upon GIFs. Our goal in this commentary, therefore, is not to take a position on whether the disclosure of a specified list of GIFs in the clinical setting is obligatory or premature at this moment in time. Instead, we endeavor to identify some of the nuanced issues that clinicians will likely face in the foreseeable future, given an emerging obligation to disclose clinically actionable GIFs that we assume will become more compelling to act upon as our knowledge of genomics expands. These issues include whether clinicians will be expected to look actively for GIFs, the role of patients’ informed consent, whether GIFs for adult-onset disorders should be disclosed to children, and obligations to disclose GIFs to family members of deceased patients. There is value to exploring the range of views on these questions at this time, before genomic sequencing has fully matured as a technology, so that clinicians can begin to anticipate how they will respond to the discovery of GIFs once sequencing becomes a more routine part of clinical care.