Placeholder

Feb 25, 2015

Written By Billy Sexton, Editor, AllAboutLaw.co.uk

‘Three Parent Babies’: The Lowdown on the Controversial New Law

Feb 25, 2015

Written By Billy Sexton, Editor, AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Three parent babies? This sounds like one for Jeremy Kyle or Jerry Springer, not the average law student…

Wrong! Yesterday, the UK became the first country to permit the use of “three-person IVF”. It’s a controversial amendment to the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act that has raised both ethical and legal questions.

But before we tackle these questions, time for a quick science lesson (oh, the joy). The scientific development would allow for mitochondrial DNA transfer, meaning IVF clinics can replace an egg's defective mitochondrial DNA with healthy DNA. This healthy DNA would come from an extra female donor, which explains the term ‘three parent babies’. This healthy DNA would prevent children from developing mitochondrial disease. This is caused by mitochondrial DNA (which provides energy to organs) dying out, resulting in the muscles and organs shutting down.

Around 1 in 200 babies in the UK are born each year with the potential to develop this disease. There were 724,000 births in 2011, meaning that around 3,620 babies are born every year with the potential to develop mitochondrial disease. Surely this itself is ample argument to support the implementation of the ‘three parent babies’ and advances in medicine that can prevent this disease?

That’s what some people would argue, but others would say that it allows parents to ‘play God’ with their child. David Cameron denied this, but allowed his MP’s a free vote on the matter – it would be political suicide for a Conservative Prime Minister to whip a party line on such a conscientious issue. Ideology aside, the new amendment has raised a number of legal questions.

For instance, 50 MEP’s wrote to David Cameron “to express our profound concern at the intention of the UK to permit the modification of the human genome. Your proposals violate the fundamental standards of human dignity and integrity of the person. Modification of the genome is unethical and cannot be permitted.” Whilst this letter portrays an emotive, ethical argument, there is potentially a sticky issue with the amendment breaching the EU’s Clinical Trials to future generations.

Specifically, Article 9(6) of the European Directive (2001/20/EC) states that “No gene therapy trials may be carried out which result in modifications to the subject’s germ line”. Indeed (more science, sorry guys), gene therapy amounts to using DNA that encodes a functional, therapeutic gene to replace a mutated gene. Both methods of mitochondrial DNA transfer – one that replaces the parent’s embryo with a donor embryo, but keeps the parent’s nucleus, and the other that replaces the mother’s egg with a donor egg, whilst keeping the mother’s nucleus – could violate this directive.

However, the British government have argued that the directive relates only to “clinical trials on medicinal products” and, therefore doesn’t apply to this amendment. Additionally, the EU Tissues and Cells Directive (2004/23/EC) is more relevant legislation relating to this issue, and states that “This Directive should not interfere with decisions made by Member States concerning the use or non-use of any specific type of human cells, including germ cells and embryonic stem cells.”

 If, however, any particular use of such cells is authorised in a Member State, this Directive will require the application of all provisions necessary to protect public health, given the specific risks of these cells based on the scientific knowledge and their particular nature, and guarantee respect for fundamental rights.

Moreover, this Directive should not interfere with provisions of Member States defining the legal term ‘person’ or ‘individual’. Additionally, Thomas de la Mare QC has stated that the technique is completely legal under EU law.

That clears that up, but the entire episode has raised some very interesting legal questions and reveals the intricacies of EU law and the number of directives that need to be considered. 

Advertisement

Placeholder
Placeholder

Advertisement

Placeholder
Placeholder
Placeholder

Blog