I entirely agree, although I believe that the PCT is now considering providing the three rounds of treatment, which is fantastic. All credit is due to that PCT.
The third argument that underpins quite a few discussions here concerns the nature of embryos and the way in which we think of them. That issue was raised by the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh) when he quoted from ““The Brothers Karamazov””. In the section to which he referred, one of the characters undergoes a religious conversion and then talks about salvation through universal love. It is fine to have a religious view of embryos, and I am sure that many people have such a view, but what we are considering is a legal way of regulating experiments with embryos, and the legal status of embryos. That is different from having a religious view of them.
Much of the discussion of abortion and termination concerns the way in which we regard the foetus at the later stages of development, the strong feelings that people have as a child moves towards viability, and the status and respect that we should accord to that child in law. In the context of embryo research, we are dealing with the same debate, but in relation to the very early stages of development. Passions run as high in relation to those early stages as they do in relation to the later stages, for very obvious reasons.
The Bill sets out some good, straightforward provisions, under which the foetus starts to have a separate status at the time when the primeval streak develops. That is the point at which we should start to consider a different status for what was previously a cluster of cells. I want to say a little about that earlier stage as well. It is, I think, very easy to say ““This is a human being, but just in one or two cells””—and, of course, that is exactly what people will see if the pregnancy is wanted and planned, and would lead to a much-loved child. However, those who have been through the process of IVF, as I have, will know perfectly well, because they have had to learn the hard way, that it is not really the case at all.
People go through the process of wanting a baby, hoping for a baby, experiencing all the disasters, and then undergoing IVF treatment. On a screen in a private room they see a little blob, and someone says ““That is a baby””— or they see that it is a baby. Then the one blob becomes two blobs, and sometimes it becomes four, and then it disappears, because it was never going to come to anything anyway. It might have had some potential for life, but that was never going to develop. It was only going to be one or two or four cells; they were not differentiating, and nothing was ever going to happen. We must take that into account in considering such groups of cells and in deciding what should happen to them and the status they should be accorded in law—and therefore the way in which we should then be able to manipulate them for the good of improving the prospects of in vitro fertilisation, as well as for understanding a bit more about the science of life and what make us human, and for understanding a little more about some of the appalling diseases and conditions that affect human beings and thus finding cures for them.
In talking about embryo research—about how we should be able to manipulate embryos and for how long, and how the regulations should work—we must understand that the people engaged in this work will have the most profound respect for life and for the process of human gestation and birth. Securing improvements in both outcomes for people who suffer from infertility and need IVF treatment and the conditions of people with appalling diseases will come, in part, from making sure that we have good regulation that enables our scientists to manipulate, and experiment with, these cells at this very early stage. That is why it is important that we pass this Bill in its current form, so that we make sure that our scientists and regulators are equipped with the tools they need to improve our science, our understanding of human life and people's prospects.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Sally Keeble
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 22 October 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
481 c372-3 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:28:15 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506476
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506476
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506476