Bioethics body says no to embryo freezing

The Bioethics Consultative Committee has taken a stand against surrogacy, the freezing of embryos and the donation of sperm and ova.

In a meeting last week, the committee - appointed by the government to advise it on bioethical issues, decided that the freezing of embryos would unnecessarily endanger human life.

Contacted by The Times, committee chairman Michael Asciak said yesterday freezing would also present a problem to the authorities, with a large number of extra embryos remaining frozen and unclaimed.

However, temporary freezing in the case of illness or death of the mother in the short period between the fertilisation of the ova and the implantation of the fertilised eggs in the uterus was considered as a special case. The committee decided that this should be dealt with by a special medical board.

The adoption of such embryos should be possible under very special circumstances.

The committee also suggested that not more than two embryos, preferably one, are inserted at every IVF attempt.

Dr Asciak, a Nationalist member of Parliament, said the committee agreed that all married couples should have recourse to in-vitro fertilisation but it did not reach a consensus on whether unmarried couples should be allowed access to the procedure.

He said the majority of the committee members were in favour of allowing stable but unmarried cohabiting couples access to the procedure because it was not illegal for them to have children privately out of wedlock.

However, he said, there were some members who objected on the grounds that this would entail "bringing children into a legally and socially unstable environment and would undermine the strength of marriage as a social lay institution". They also thought it would conflict with the spirit of present Maltese law on marriage, which does not contemplate divorce or allow unmarried couples to adopt children.

Earlier this summer the committee had unanimously agreed that life begins when there is the mingling of the mother's and father's chromosomes - amphimixis - which creates a human embryo.

In its second set of conclusions on certain aspects of IVF, the committee reached a consensus that medical or diagnostic interventions on the embryo or foetus should only take place for the benefit of the same embryo or foetus. Dr Asciak said the committee unanimously opposed surrogacy because this would "involve the inclusion of a third person in the sexual relationship". The committee also believes that the child would have both a genetic and a nurturing mother, which would create an internal conflict.

Moreover, it said, the maternal bond which develops between the natural mother and the child would also present problems. The committee insisted that the child has the right to know who its genetic mother is.

The committee reached a consensus against the donation of sperm or ova, arguing that this would introduce a third party into the sexual relationship and would create identity problems for the affected child, who, it said, had the right to know the real parents. Legal problems were also envisaged by the committee.