Page URL:

UK Government proposes new laws on assisted reproduction

17 December 2006
Appeared in BioNews 389

On Thursday 14 December, UK Public Health Minister Caroline Flint announced the publication of the British Government's proposals for a major overhaul of the law on assisted human reproduction and embryo research. The proposals, contained in a new 'White Paper', follow an extensive public consultation exercise on the current law, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology (HFE) Act 1990.

The White Paper states that the statutory functions currently performed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and the Human Tissue Authority (HTA) should be combined under one new body, the Regulatory Authority for Tissue and Embryos (RATE). In the run-up to RATE, Health Ministers propose to appoint a single individual to separately Chair the HTA and HFEA to move the Authorities further towards working as an integrated body. Launching the White Paper, Ms Flint said that 'the current law, which has served us well, is in need of revision', adding that 'technology has changed, and so have attitudes'.

One of the major proposals contained in the White Paper states that the 'need for a father' clause should be removed from the provisions of the law. Currently, the HFE Act stipulates that fertility treatment providers should take into account the welfare of the potential child to be born, including that child's need for a father. If the new proposals become law, it would mean that clinics would not be able to refuse treatment to single women or lesbian couples on that basis alone. In fact, it is also recommended that the parenthood provisions within the legislation are to be extended to include civil partners and other same-sex couples. However, the other welfare of the child checks should be retained, says the White Paper, even though this part of the existing law has faced heavy criticism since 1990, mainly because couples who can conceive naturally do not face similar checks or investigation into their suitability as parents.

It is also proposed that Internet sperm donor services be brought within the ambit of the regulation and that the use of sex selection techniques for 'social' reasons - either using PGD (preimplantation genetic diagnosis) or sperm sorting methods - be formally banned, even for the purpose of 'family balancing'. Deliberately 'screening in' a disease or disorder (for example if two deaf parents wished to have a deaf child) will also be banned, although the screening of embryos for serious genetic diseases, as well as to see if they could be a tissue match for an existing sick sibling, will continue to be permitted under licence. However, in terms of embryo research, the creation of chimeras will be banned, at least initially, although scientists will be allowed to alter the genetic structure of reproductive cells - though they will be banned from implanting such an embryo created using these into a woman in order to make a baby.

In relation to the use of donor sperm, eggs and embryos, no changes are proposed to the law - which was last changed in 2004 anyway - on the anonymity of donors. In fact, some of the recent changes are to be incorporated into and developed within the new law: donor-conceived children will be allowed to find out the name of their donor and also if they have sisters or brothers also conceived through donation, when they reach the age of 18. Donors will be informed if a donor-conceived child is seeking identifying information about them.

Following from some recent high-profile cases, such as that taken by Natallie Evans, the statutory storage period for embryos is to be extended from five to 10 years, while a 'cooling off period' of up to one year will be put in place if consent to embryo storage by one of the couple involved is withdrawn.

Comment on the proposals has tended to focus most on the welfare of the child provisions. Josephine Quintavalle, of Comment on Reproductive Ethics, criticised the removal of the 'need for a father reference' saying that it is 'a dreadful statement to make about the role of men' and adding that 'fatherhood is much more than the donation of sperm'. However, Liberal Democrat MP Dr Evan Harris welcomed the removal of the 'need for a father' clause, calling it 'unjustifiable, discriminatory and vindictive' and adding that 'it was also unsustainable in human rights and equality terms'. Anna Smajdor, researcher in medical ethics at Imperial College London, agreed, saying that the 'removal of the specific reference to a need for a father is on balance a good thing', but adding that 'it still remains utterly bizarre that fertility clinicians should be responsible for making judgements about the suitability of people to be parents'.

The HTA has welcomed the White Paper, saying that 'bringing all matters concerning human tissue, gametes and embryos under a single framework will ensure consistency of approach in these closely related areas'. Shirley Harrison, Interim Chair of the HTA said: 'We have worked to establish the HTA as a regulator that uses a modern and creative approach. We are fully supportive of RATE and want to see the new Authority combine the best of both the HTA and the HFEA to become a model of better regulation'.

Full parental rights for gay couples
The Times |  15 December 2006
Gay couples to get full rights in donor child proposals
The Guardian |  15 December 2006
Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act: Proposals for revised legislation (including establishment of the Regulatory Authority for Tissue and Embryos)
Department of Health |  14 December 2006
Way clear for single women and lesbians to access IVF treatment
The Scotsman |  15 December 2006
19 June 2007 - by Antony Starza-Allen 
The UK's Academy of Medical Sciences has backed the creation of human-animal embryos for use in stem cell research, which is says should be subject to the same rules as research on human embryos, including the 14-day rule and a ban on implanting embryos into a...
21 May 2007 - by Antony Starza-Allen 
The UK Government has published a draft version of the Human Tissue and Embryos Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny. The proposals will amend the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. As it stands, the Bill will ban the creation of embryos that contain genetic material from both animals...
10 April 2007 - by Dr John Gillott 
The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee's report, 'Government Proposals for the Regulation of Hybrid and Chimera Embryos', is its response to two related events: firstly the UK Government's intention to outlaw the creation of such entities, announced in December 2006 in its White Paper (1), and secondly the...
10 April 2007 - by Antony Starza-Allen 
The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has challenged the UK Government's decision to propose a ban on the creation of hybrid or chimera embryos, calling such a move 'unnecessary'. In the report, the MPs said: 'We find that the creation of human-animal chimera or hybrid...
5 March 2007 - by Dr Jess Buxton 
The UK Government's chief scientific adviser has expressed his support for proposals to use animal eggs in the creation of human embryonic stem (ES) cells for research purposes. Sir David King said last week that such work should be allowed under tight regulations, adding that it...
12 November 2006 - by Dr Kirsty Horsey 
New research detailing the UK public's views on IVF and related fertility issues has been published. The research was carried out by YouGov on behalf of the UK charity Progress Educational Trust in October 2006, in the form of two online survey questionnaires, to which a...
12 November 2006 - by Khadija Ibrahim 
Issues surrounding infertility and reproductive medicine are rarely out of the news - delaying motherhood, egg and sperm donation, embryo testing and access to fertility treatment, to name just a few. But the published opinions triggered by this extensive media coverage have tended to be those of a select few doctors...
3 April 2006 - by Dr John Parsons 
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (HFE Act) was passed by the British Parliament in 1990 to regulate the then relatively new field of assisted conception. One of the provisions of the Act was that there should be a statutory licensing body, so the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA...
7 November 2005 - by Dr Evan Harris 
This week, BioNews reports that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has published its proposed new guidance to licensed clinics on how to interpret the 'welfare of the child' principle laid down in section 13(5) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. The new guidance moves matters on...
3 November 2005 - by BioNews 
The UK's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has issued new guidance for IVF clinics on how to consider the welfare of children born following the use of assisted conception techniques. It states that before offering infertility treatment, doctors should take into account the risk of any serious medical, physical...
to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions

Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.