Printed from: https://archive.cmf.org.uk/advocacy/submissions/?id=57
Published: 29th October 2008
Amendment 92 would allow the use of tissue from children, mentally incapacitated adults, and existing stored cells, to be used without explicit consent, to make animal-human hybrids for stem cell research using cloning techniques.
This provision was not part of the original bill and it is difficult to reconcile with previous statements made on behalf of the Government. Baroness Royall of Blaisdon stated on 21 January, 2008, (col. 52) that "consent to the creation, keeping and use of embryos, and consent for treatment or research, is one of the cornerstones of the 1990 Act, and is carried forward by the Bill. The Bill sets out to ensure that human and human-admixed embryos may only be created for research purposes, and only where the person to whom the cells belong gives their explicit consent"' She concluded that "the Government takes the view that we should not, in any circumstances, presume that a person's cells can be used in the creation of embryos without their consent or knowledge".
When Health Minister Lord Darzi introduced the possibility of using tissue without consent in a letter to Peers on 31 January, 2008, [1] he talked only about "a limited exception to the requirement to obtain express consent for existing stocks of cells and cell lines". He added that "it will be particularly important that the exception should only apply where there would be a significant adverse impact on scientific research in the public interest, if existing cells could not be used".
The scope of amendment 92 is, however, far broader even than this. It now allows the use of new tissue in addition to "existing stocks" and requires, in the case of children and mentally incapacitated adults, only that there be "reasonable grounds for believing research of comparable effectiveness could not be carried out using the human cells of a person who could consent themselves".
Curing disease is a noble goal which unites us all, but must not be won at the cost of overriding our commitment to a basic axiom of human rights. We cannot allow the end to justify the means. As was said recently in another place, "Science matters, but morals matter more". Consent is a cornerstone in medical ethics and the interests of human beings must never be made subservient to the interests of science or society. This historic principle was acquired during darker moments in human history and we urge you to uphold it no matter how compelling you may find the counter arguments raised today.
Amendment 92 will require changes to other pieces of legislation, such as the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and common law governing children, which both reinforce this historic principle. Amendment 92 will tip the ethical balance in favour of science and against the rights of mentally incapacitated adults and children.
Adopting this amendment will undermine public confidence in scientific research and isolate Britain from the international community.
This is time for great caution. There is too much at stake. We urge you to vote against Amendment 92.
Countess Josephine Quintavalle, Comment on Reproductive Ethics
Dr Peter Saunders, Christian Medical Fellowship
Andrea Minichiello Williams, Christian Legal Centre
Steven Fouch (CMF Head of Communications) 020 7234 9668
Alistair Thompson on 07970 162 225
Christian Medical Fellowship (CMF) was founded in 1949 and is an interdenominational organisation with over 5,000 doctors, 900medical and nursing students and 300 nurses and midwives as members in all branches of medicine, nursing and midwifery. A registered charity, it is linked to over 100 similar bodies in other countries throughout the world.
CMF exists to unite Christian healthcare professionals to pursue the highest ethical standards in Christian and professional life and to increase faith in Christ and acceptance of his ethical teaching.
