In-vitro fertilisation should not be allowed in Malta, since research was still too early to guarantee a healthy life to children, Commissioner for Children Sonia Camilleri told the parliamentary Social Affairs Committee.

"Just as nobody has the right to kill a child, nobody has the right to have a baby at all costs," she said.

She expressed her amazement that in Malta there was a consensus against abortion, but enthusiasm for legislation in favour of IVF. If this hurry to legislate was because IVF was already taking place in Malta, then a step back should be made.

Mrs Camilleri said the indications were that a journey outside the mother's uterus was extremely dangerous. A study by the UK's Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child showed that only one in 25 embryos created by IVF survived until birth.

It also said that while in the past 24 years, 68,000 children were born through IVF, during the same period 1.8 million embryos were frozen, thrown away or used in scientific research.

Asked by Nationalist MP Mario Galea whether similar statistics existed in Malta, the commissioner said this was not the case.

The society, she continued, also had research which indicated a higher rate of cancer in children conceived through IVF.

Another study showed that IVF babies had three times more chance than other children to develop cerebral palsy. These things were never mentioned, she pointed out.

Mrs Camilleri said if the unborn child was able to speak, it would probably say: "Leave me alone, are the natural dangers not enough?"

The commissioner said IVF was a big industry which convinced a lot of couples that it was the only way through which they could have a baby, even though it cost a lot of money and did not guarantee that the couple would have a baby.

"IVF does not cure infertility, and if we focus solely on IVF, the infertility problem will remain with us," she said, adding that after IVF the mother would still be infertile, and would have to resort again to science if she wanted more children.

Asked by committee chairman Clyde Puli whether she would be in favour of IVF if no extra embryos were created and no freezing took place, Mrs Camilleri said she would only agree if the whole process was healthy and no child was lost. She asked whether it was scientifically possible to create just one embryo in a laboratory.

"We should wait a little more, let science develop more, and speak again in some years' time," she said.

Replying to questions by Frederick Azzopardi and Michael Gonzi (PN), she said that once a woman tried all natural methods and still failed to conceive, she should accept the fact that that she could not have children.

Dr Gonzi told Mrs Camilleri that such reasoning may be easy for her, but difficult for couples desperate to have children.

Mrs Camilleri said that being desperate for something did not mean one should put children's life in danger.

Dr Gonzi said that when he spoke to parents who had children through IVF, he could see how their life had been positively transformed. Their life previously was shattered and now they were happy. And he was even more pleased to see the children, whose existence was only possible through God and thanks to the doctors and technology. Did Mrs Camilleri not accept that this was a most beautiful thing that she was trying to stop?

Mrs Camilleri pointed out once more than 68,000 babies had been born as a result of IVF in the past 24 years, but 1.2 million had died. That 68,000 babies had been born was a beautiful thing, and possibly as many as 68,000 families were happier now, but one cannot forget the other 1.2 million.

Dr Gonzi said he agreed, but when a doctor started IVF procedures his intention was to fertilise and allow all embryos to live. Furthermore, 20 per cent of normal pregnancies were miscarried. So why could she not accept that there could be a percentage of embryos which could be unavoidably lost even though one wanted all embryos to lead to birth?

To stop IVF meant not giving any embryo a chance. It was true that the success rate was low at present but it was rising. Did she not accept that these 68,000 families could have been potentially destroyed because of the tensions of being unable to bear children?

Mrs Camilleri said one had to see how many of these families knew of natural technologies which would help them conceive.

Dr Gonzi said hardly anyone opted for IVF unless there was conclusive evidence that they could not have children.

Mrs Camilleri said she knew couples who opted for IVF without knowing about the natural methods.

Dr Gonzi said that was true to a point - indeed the committee had heard people who went for IVF but had a natural pregnancy after eight years. But what if a doctor decided that IVF was the only solution to have children?

Mrs Camilleri said natural methods had a higher success rate than IVF.

Dr Gonzi said some people could simply not have children naturally. What was one to do?

Mrs Camilleri said that in many cases people did not try all natural methods. Many people never even tried natural methods.

The same thing happened in contraception. Some people who did not want children immediately used contraception without even trying the natural methods.

She could speak from her own experience. Her husband and herself never tried contraception because they were well versed about natural methods. They had as many children as they had wished.

But how many people tried or sought information on natural methods? Similarly, doctors advised contraception rather than natural methods. The same applied for IVF. Many couples went for IVF without knowing of the other methods. Even many doctors did not know about them.

But, Dr Gonzi insisted that some people had physical conditions which prevented them from having children. Would she still insist on natural methods?

Mrs Camilleri said there were three positions: where possible one should go for natural methods. If not, was one prepared to risk the death of embryos in order to have children?

And, thirdly, could couples accept their own particular circumstances in life, such as not having children?

She wished she were tall and slim, but she wasn't but she had accepted that fact.