THE Embryology Bill making its way through Parliament is a complex and provocative piece of legislation that the Government believes will help place us at the forefront of new research whilst addressing a number of ethical issues surrounding embryo procedures.
Why then are Cardinals publicly challenging the Prime Minister and MPs' post bags brimming with letters on this subject? The prominent issue appears to be human-animal hybrids which cross an entirely new moral boundary and seem to have struck a 'yuck
' factor with the general public, where polling shows 61% oppose such research.
There are in fact two types of stem cell research. That from adult stem cells, which come from umbilical cord blood or parts of the body such as skin cells, which is non controversial. And that from embryonic stem cells, from fertilised eggs or cloned material and which normally results in the destruction of the embryos. Many countries do not permit this on ethical grounds but Britain has embraced it as New Labour and the previous Tory administration were convinced of its value.
The Americans decided to abandon funding embryo research and focus on adult stem cells as a less controversial alternative. The comparative results make interesting reading with 80 treatments developed from this method whilst embryonic research has so far yielded no practical applications. To make matters worse, embryo researchers now need animal eggs as they are running out of human eggs.
Not all scientists agree about the issues and notably Colin McGuckin, professor of regenerative medicine at Newcastle University, has said: "There are many types of stem cells available to develop new drug therapies and I think the over-emphasis in our country on embryonic stem cells is disappointing." In Japan, Professor Shinya Yamanaka developed a technique for turning skin cells into stem cells with the same characteristics as embryonic stem cells. Sir Ian Wilmut, who developed therapeutic cloning and produced the famous Dolly, has abandoned embryonic research and says Prof Yamanaka's technique "has got so much more potential".
It would appear the Government may have backed the wrong technology. Why should we continue investing public money in such controversial projects which are yielding poor results? It has been put to me that these early stage hybrids are just a collection of cells which will not be allowed to develop beyond 14 days. But why should we trust the Government to regulate such an important issue when they are incapable of even looking after our social security details?
If there is a lesson to be learnt from the last 15 years it is that good science and good ethics are not incompatible and our Government needs to recognise this if they are going to make good policy. The proponents of this legislation say traditionalists are over reacting, but clearly other European countries do not consider this a trivial matter as any scientist in Germany who created a hybrid would face 10 years in prison!
Another consideration in the bill is the removal of the requirement to consider the need for a father in IVF treatment. This is principally designed to facilitate same sex couples but children are being denied the fundamental right to know who their father is and this surely sends the wrong message about responsible fatherhood.
The other big issue emerging from this embryology bill is the opportunity to revisit the abortion act. Once again the advancement of science plays a part here with premature children surviving at and before the present 24-week abortion limit. We can now scan a 12-week foetus and see the perfectly formed limbs, which reinforces the potential for life and recognises the lost possibilities for these unborn people.
We now have the chilling dichotomy of two women in the same hospital at the 24th week of pregnancy – one gives birth prematurely and modern technology ensures the survival of the child, whilst the other has an abortion where the foetus, which may very well feel pain, is ripped from the womb and destroyed. Last year in Scotland there were more than 13,000 abortions, yet we are forecasting chronic population ageing and decline. Everyone agrees teenage pregnancy rates need to fall but perhaps the time has come to review the present policy where clinics often encourage abortion.
We are clearly out of line with the rest of Europe, where most countries have an abortion limit of 12 weeks. It was encouraging to note that many senior Tories are in favour of a reduction from the present limit. It was disappointing to see that Gordon Brown will be voting for the status quo on the basis of scientific advice – but exactly which scientists is he listening to, and aren't politicians supposed to lead and set the ethical agenda rather than the reverse?
Nelson Mandela once said "there can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children". The coming weeks will see the soul of our society exposed to public view in a unique way as most parties are not whipping their MPs. I would therefore encourage everyone to debate these issues fully and lobby their MP to make sure you get your say. Anyone for a referendum? Only joking!
The full article contains 881 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
