ABC v Thomson Medical Pte Ltd and others, Singapore Civil Court of Appeal [2017] SGCA 20 - read judgment It is a trite reflection that law should change with the times but every so often we see the hair-pin bends in law's pursuit of modern technology. This case from Singapore about reproductive rights and negligence…
In this case, a mistake was made in the process of an in vitro-fertilisation procedure involving a Singaporean Chinese woman and her German Caucasian husband.
Mistakenly, the wife’s egg was inseminated with sperm from an unknown Indian donor.
Baby P was born healthy, but with a different skin tone.
The claimant’s affidavit states that the pain and suffering that she suffered as a result, physically, mentally and emotionally, was “beyond words” and was “agonizing”
FERTILITY regulators have triggered a new row over designer babies by allowing doctors to destroy embryos affected by more than 100 genetic conditions, including many illnesses that are not life-threatening. The genetic “defects” that can now be routinely screened out include conditions carried by a number of leading figures, such as Pete Sampras, the tennis champion, and Sergei Rachmaninoff, the Russian concert pianist and composer. In some cases it will mean the elimination of an embryo that has been identified as carrying genetic material inherited from a stricken grandparent, but which may not necessarily develop the same illness. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), has published a list of 116 inherited conditions that fertility clinics can screen out without requiring special permission.
Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is a technique that enables people with a specific inherited condition in their family to avoid passing it on to their children. It involves checking the genes of embryos created through IVF for this genetic condition. Before PGD clinics are permitted to test for a condition or combination of conditions, the HFEA must first agree that the condition they want to test for is sufficiently serious. This list of conditions are those that the HFEA has so far agreed that it is acceptable for clinics to use PGD to test for.
The article in the Sunday Times last week ‘Embryos destroyed for minor disorders’ was inaccurate and misleading and could cause confusion and distress for those families undergoing or considering IVF treatment with pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD is licensed only for serious medical conditions which severely threaten the future health and wellbeing of children. It is not a ‘routine’ procedure. In 2007, out of nearly 37,000 patients who received fertility treatment, 169 had PGD, fewer than one in 200. Embryos are tested when they are just three days old and made up of about eight cells. They are not at the developed stage of the foetus as shown in the photograph.Finally, to suggest that embryos are destroyed for ‘minor conditions’ which would require ‘unpleasant treatment’ is not only misleading, it is disrespectful both to those living with the condition, and those seeking to avoid passing on these serious conditions to their children.
The new parenthood provisions set out in Part 2 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 have been attacked as dangerous and radical, offering a 'lego-kit model of family life' and a 'magical mystery tour' in how legal fatherhood is to be determined. In this paper, we explain what is innovative about these new provisions but also explore what they owe to deep-rooted traditional assumptions about the family. Relying both on published documentation relating to this reform process and a small number of key actor interviews, we trace the imprint of what Fineman has described as the 'sexual family' model on the provisions. We conclude that the way that parenthood is framed within the legislation relies on a number of important normative assumptions which received very little scrutiny in this process. We also highlight a number of tensions within this framing which, we suggest, may create future problems for judicial determination.
BERLIN — Embryos created during in vitro fertilization can be screened for genetic defects before being implanted in the womb, a German high court said in a landmark ruling Tuesday. The Federal Supreme Court in Leipzig ruled in support of a Berlin gynecologist who had carried out screening on embryos for three different couples and implanted only those that were healthy. The embryos with hereditary genetic defects were left to die off. The high court's ruling upheld a decision by a Berlin state court that the doctor's action did not violate German laws for the protection of embryos. The 47-year-old doctor, who was not identified by the court, brought the case to court himself in 2006 to clarify the legal situation. He was first acquitted by a regional court in Berlin, but the city's state prosecutor appealed.
A decision last week by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court to acquit a gynaecologist of illegal abortion after he chose to carry out genetic diagnosis on several human embryos and discarded those with genetic defects has stirred a debate about the possible need for a new law tightening the rules on preimplantation genetic diagnosis. The landmark ruling said that embryos created from in vitro fertilisation (IVF) can be screened for genetic defects before being implanted in the womb. The 47 year old doctor, who was not identified, brought the case to court himself in 2006 to clarify the legal situation. He had already been acquitted in May 2009 by a regional court in Berlin, but the prosecutor had appealed the decision.
Children born as a result of assisted reproductive technology (ART) have a higher risk of major congenital malformation than previously thought, show results from a study presented at the annual conference of the European Society of Human Genetics in Gothenburg, Sweden, on 14 June.
This short paper for one of the world's leading bioethics journals introduces readers to medical tourism - the travel of patients from their home country to another for the primary purpose of seeking medical treatment. The paper divides medical tourism into three types: (1) Medical tourism for services illegal in both the patient's home and destination countries (e.g., organ transplant tourism); (2) Medical tourism for services that are illegal in the patient's home country but legal in the destination country (e.g., some forms of fertility tourism, euthanasia tourism, experimental drug tourism); (3) Medical tourism for services legal in both the home and destination country (e.g., traveling abroad for a heart valve or hip replacement). The paper then discusses several difficult ethical and regulatory challenges posed by each type of medical tourism.
The UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) is investigating websites that match up sperm donors with women who want to conceive, to see whether they may be breaking the law. The move by the HFEA follows the conviction at Southwark Crown Court in London of Ricky Gage and Nigel Woodforth, who made £250 000 (€295 000; $400 000) from their company Fertility 1st, which couriered sperm from donors to women who were trying to conceive. The pair face a possible jail term when they are sentenced in October. They fell foul of a law that makes the procurement of gametes, including human sperm, illegal without a licence from the HFEA.
Clinicians and egg donors have signalled their support for a rise in the amount of compensation paid to women who donate eggs to infertile women in the United Kingdom, as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority prepares to launch a public consultation on the subject.
The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, announced her objection to preimplantation genetic diagnosis at a recent party conference. However, she has agreed to a free parliamentary vote on whether to allow pre-screening of fertilised embryos in Germany. Meanwhile her coalition partner has replied that his party would not tolerate a complete ban. Christian Lindner, general secretary of the liberal Free Democratic Party, expressed his “regret that this chancellor, as a scientist, hasn’t given greater recognition to the method.” Officially Germany, in contrast to other European countries, has forbidden preimplantation genetic diagnosis since 1990, under the Embryo Protection Law, but some legal uncertainty remained. In July 2010 the Federal Supreme Court in Leipzig had ruled in support of a Berlin gynaecologist who had carried out screening on embryos for three different couples and implanted only those that were healthy.
The safety of UK couples who travel abroad for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment is being jeopardised by the lack of uniform clinical and safety regulations, say fertility organisations. Women are at greater risk of multiple births, which increases the danger of medical complications to mother and baby, says a new report by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and the International Federation of Fertility Societies. A survey of more than 100 countries looking at the rules and regulations relating to assisted conception, particularly IVF, found that some countries have high numbers of multiple pregnancy because of the number of embryos they transfer during assisted conception.
All new IVF treatment will stop in Surrey as the NHS tackles a deficit this year of £125m. The board of NHS Surrey met in Cobham on Friday to look at how to tackle "serious financial challenges". A spokesman said current courses of IVF would continue and women nearing 40 would still be considered, with IVF policy to be reviewed next November. NHS Surrey is also no longer funding some treatments including acupuncture and some cosmetic procedures. Treatments which would no longer be funded included male baldness, facial blushing, tattoo removal and spinal epidural injections for chronic back pain.
OTTAWA — A Supreme Court ruling placing much of Canada's burgeoning fertility industry under provincial control leaves an enormous gap in the regulation of artificial procreation and exposes women who use the technologies and the children born from them to potential harm, critics say. A sharply divided court struck down key federal powers to regulate assisted human reproduction Wednesday, concluding that several parts of a new law fall under provincial jurisdiction over health care. The ruling effectively stops a federal move toward national standards and guts Assisted Human Reproduction Canada — an embattled federal agency that was struck four years ago to monitor how assisted procreation is carried out at more than two dozen fertility clinics across the country.
Compensation paid to egg and sperm donors in the United Kingdom could be increased to include a payment for inconvenience, in a bid to tackle an acute shortage of donated gametes. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), which regulates infertility treatment, raises the possibility in a review of its policies on egg and sperm donation launched on 17 January. European law bans payment for donated gametes but allows donors to be compensated for expenses, loss of earnings, and inconvenience. Current HFEA rules allow egg donors to be reimbursed for loss of earnings and expenses, such as travel costs, up to a maximum of £250 (€300; $400). But nothing can be claimed for the physical inconvenience that gamete donors experience, even though egg donation is invasive and sperm donation time consuming.
Should the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) be rescued from the axe, or should it, as the UK government proposes, be allowed to perish, its functions absorbed by larger, more general bodies? At a panel discussion organised by the Progress Educational Trust at the Royal Society in central London, three of the four speakers favoured retaining a specialist regulator of infertility treatment and embryo research. But Alison Murdoch, professor of reproductive medicine at Newcastle University’s Institute of Human Genetics, disagreed and called for an independent review of the HFEA’s function in regulating treatment.