Assisted Human Reproduction (PDF)

With contributions from: Eric Blyth, Ken Daniels, Julia Feast,
Robert Lee, Nina Martin, Alexina McWhinnie, Derek Morgan, Clare
Murray, Sharon Pettle, Claire Potter, Jim Richards and Francoise
Shenfield

The separation of procreation from conception has broadened
notions of parenthood and created novel dilemmas. A woman may carry
a foetus derived from gametes neither or only one of which came
from her or her partner; or she may carry a foetus created using in
vitro fertilisation (IVF) with the purpose of handing it to two
other parents one, neither or both of whom may be genetically
related to the prospective child. Parents may consist of single-sex
couples, only one of them genetically related to the child; the
prospective mother may be past her menopause; and genetic
parenthood after death is now achievable. In a world increasingly
reliant on medical science, how can the argument that equates
traditional with natural and novel with unnatural/unethical be
justified? Should there be legislation, which is notoriously slow
to change, in a field driven by dazzling new possibilities at ever
faster rate; particularly when restrictions differ from country to
country, so that those who can afford it travel elsewhere for their
treatment of choice? Whose rights are paramount - the adults hoping
to build a family or the prospective child(ren)s future well being?
On what basis can apparently competing rights be regulated or
adjudicated and how and to what extent can these be enforced in
practice?