PHG Foundation | www.phgfoundation.org

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill received considerable media and Parliamentary coverage in May as members of the House of Commons spent two days debating its most contentious clauses on which they had been given a free vote. Gordon Brown briefed Labour members of Parliament in advance by letter which set out utilitarian arguments in favour of the proposed legislation, suggesting that Britain’s ongoing support for stem cells was ‘not only in our own interest, but also the global interest’. Despite speculation that a government defeat might be imminent, in a debate on 19 May there was support for the legislation with many MP’s justifying these advances on the basis of their potential for developing effective treatments in the future. The majority of MP’s supported clauses to allow the creation of human admixed embryos within a tightly regulated research environment.

They also supported the selection of embryos which could be used to treat siblings affected by a serious genetic condition, (so called ‘saviour siblings’). In responses to questions about the scope of this clause, the Minister of State for Health, Dawn Primarolo acknowledged that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) had licensed more than 80 conditions for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis including Huntington’s disease, muscular dystrophy and cystic fibrosis and that the selection of diseases which could qualify as ‘serious’ and utilise the techniques described in the Bill was a matter for the HFEA’s ethics committee. In the same debate, Dawn Primarolo also signalled the prospect of further regulation concerning the use of stem cell lines for treatment rather than research, acknowledging that the regulatory oversight by the HFEA ‘finishes once a stem cell line is derived’. Interim guidance has been published by the Human Tissue Authority.

The House of Commons also supported changes to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 to require clinicians to consider the need of any child born as a result of assisted reproduction to have supportive parenting (which replaces an explicit requirement to consider the need for a father). The Bill was also used as a vehicle to debate the ethics of abortion. One contentious area was the extent to which the time limit for certain types of abortion (excluding those carried out on grounds of fetal disability) should be reduced from the current limit of 24 weeks. It was argued that care of premature babies had improved and some evidence suggested that babies born at 22 or 23 weeks had improved viability. After considerable debate, MP’s voted for existing time limits to be retained.

In subsequent committee debates in the House of Commons, the Bill has been further amended to set out the basis for using cells from those lacking capacity (either as children or adults) or where the donor can no longer be identified or has died. These amendments are in line with the legislative framework laid down by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Human Tissue Act 2004. With the House of Commons committee stage due to be completed by 17 June, one might expect the Bill to receive Royal Assent before Parliament breaks for the summer recess (22 July) although no dates have yet been published.