Keep The HFEA but Curtail Its Decision-Making Powers

Main Category: Stem Cell Research
Article Date: 10 Dec 2004 - 12:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Professor Robert Winston has told the Today programme that he thinks the HFEA should be abolished. HFEA Chair, Ms Suzi Leather, obviously does not agree.

'Professor Robert Winston has ruffled feathers today with his suggestion that the HFEA should close shop. For once we half-agree with him,' said Josephine Quintavalle, spokesperson for Comment on Reproductive Ethics (CORE). 'There is increasing concern in the country regarding recent ethical decisions taken by the HFEA, and CORE has always argued that the big rulings should be taken by Parliament and not by this unelected non-representative body.

'Ms Leather regularly claims that the rest of the world is full of admiration for the unfortunate quango which she heads. We think not and suggest that for once the UK might like to look at the example of other countries rather than swallow this endless self-congratulation. CORE argues for the establishment of a democratically structured national bioethics committee, in line with most other European countries. Such a committee would deliberate and advise Government but would itself have no regulatory power. This is the only fair and desirable way forward in the field of assisted reproduction, where complex ethical issues arise almost on a monthly basis.

'But we do not endorse the abolition of the HFEA. This is an area of medicine where the strictest regulation is vital. It concerns the safety and welfare of children, and this should not be left up to the unregulated goodwill of the practitioners as Prof Winston seems to suggest. The HFEA should create models of inspection and control which really deliver the goods, keep extensive and accurate data, and ensure that the patient and child's welfare is never in jeopardy.

'And the HFEA must not branch out in any other direction whatsoever. They are a fertility watchdog and nothing else. Involvement in stem cell research and licensing should not be part of their remit. Extending their role in this way only leaves them open to endless accusations of conflict of interest, and given the financial imperatives behind stem cell development, these worries will only increase.'

End

Comment on Reproductive Ethics (CORE)
PO BOX 4593
London
SW3 6XE
England
Tel: 00 44 (0)20 7581 2623
Fax: 00 44 (0)20 7581 3868
http://www.corethics.org

• Additional
• References
• Citations