Director ACART
Dear Sir
1. This is a submission prepared on behalf of Right to Life by Philip Creed, Vice President of right to Life NZ Inc.
2. The views expressed in this submission represent the views of the executive of this society, and may represent the views of some or most of the membership.
Introduction
Since the advent of In vitro fertilisation in 1978, the advance of modern medicine has seen starling and welcome advances in medical techniques, technology and potential for curing or treating diseases , illnesses, medical conditions and inheritable conditions which hitherto had been untreatable.
Gene editing, once seen a science fiction, is now a reality. Treatment of infertilitiy, cancer, and other medical conditions owes much to research techniques and methods devised after much research.
However, these advances in technology have not always been associated with the advance in ethical decision making or in a bioethical framework, which encourages (a) only ethical research, concerned solely with the advancement of people’s well being, medical and psychological health (b) The widest possible application for treatment availability (c) A paradigm of academic research, cooperation and free exchange of ideas without the impingement of commercial interests (d) a commitment to treatment technologies which do not result in the commodification of life itself (e.) a commitment not to experiment on in vitro embryos and not to dispose of unwanted embryos and (f) A system of censuring, isolating and reproaching any researchers or laboratory teams who persistently breach the ethical boundaries or guidelines which need to be laid down by the international scientific and medical communities.
Statement of our position on human life
As a starting principle, we hold that all human life is precious, and is a human right from the conception of the human embryo from a fertilised egg, until the natural death of the human person.
We believe, consider that it is true to state, and know from scientific evidence that human life begins at the conception of the human embryo, when the fertilisation and first zygotes of the human cells has begun. A human life may be microscopic in size at this point, but it remains unaltered in its essence, until the death of the human genome, although the human body undergoes many thousands of changes in this period.
Because every human life is unique, unrepeatable, and every person is a unique creation different from all others who have ever lived, whether evolved from another earlier ancestor or not, we consider, and hold it to be correct to state that no person has the right or moral authority to take away that life in the name of science, or under the guise of scientific research masquerading as promoting the common good or greater good of the society which may benefit from such experiments, or from the benefits which may acrrue from such research, or perform any experiment upon a human life, at any stage of development, which will cause the death, destruction, radical metamorphosis or disfigurement in any way of the human person, whether intentional or not.
Scientific research may be carried out on animal genomes, using techniques, protocols or processes which result in the death of animals, provided that these are not done in such a way as to create or cause the animal to undergo unnecessary suffering or pain.
We hold and believe that human persons are not created to be experimented upon, and that genetic or medical experiments which are intended to improve or modify the characteristics or bodily functions of the person, are not valid, unless they have the specific aim or goal of eradicating disease, illness or genetic conditions.
Even when done, these research experiments must have been fully considered and approval by competent legislative or medical bodies, and have fully informed consent from the persons so concerned, who are capable and competent to give fully informed consent, to understand the consequences of the research experiment, and who understand the limits of such research.
It is a legal principle that nobody can give informed consent to any medical treatment without full disclosure, and that patients may refuse consent at any time prior to the medical treatment being done on them, if they are competent to do this.
There is also a legal principle of medical liability for any doctor or surgeon who wilfully or otherwise inflicts harm upon their patient.
Similar legal principles should be developed and applied in situations of medical research on living people, whether pharmaceutical, clinical trials or assisted reproductive technologies.
Legal liability for medical misadventure should also apply as a general principle for any damage, injury or adverse event caused by failure to adhere to medical research guidelines in human assisted reproductive technologies.
Affects of HRT on the family unit.
While we recognise that infertility and childlessness are problems for many couples, it may be possible that HRT treatments are not going to resolve this issue. Alternative resolutions to these problems may be found in dietary or environmental changes, or the possibility of fostering or adopting children.
Fertility treatment using IVF and other technologies may lead to undesirable outcomes:
• Excessive expenditure on expensive treatments, travel costs and time for the couple
• Spare embryos being “banked” in liquid nitrogen and frozen until they are needed
• Spare embryos being destroyed after 10 year or x number of years because of laws of limitation of storage
• Spare embryos being unclaimed in the event of the death of one or other of the couple who deposited them
• Claims to ownership of the embryos after the breakdown of the relationship of the couple who deposited them.
Our position on the bioethical framework of IVF and similar fertility treatments involving the production of excess embryos is that this is morally wrong, and that embryos should not be seen as a commodity to be “banked” or stored for years until such time as required. They are developing human persons, not complete in size, but complete in biological makeup having inherited the genes and DNA base pairs found in their parents DNA.
Philip Creed
Vice President
Right to Life NZ Incorporated