The life of the Minister of HFEA
I have been in the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority for many years. With my experience and my position as the Minister of the HFEA, I trust the decisions that I made and I believe they were made for a reason. I do hope that the Whitaker family will accept my rejection to their request.
I really want the Whitaker family to understand that the duties of the HFEA are not as easy as it seems. They consist of the regulation and inspection of all the clinics in UK that provides in vitro fertilisation, artificial insemination or the storage of human ova, sperm or embryoes. It is the dealing of lives, and we are largely responsible for any life that we allowed to be created unnaturally.
There are many concerns we have regarding the Whitaker family’s request, which is to create a life to save the life of their son, Charlie.
Should we allow another child to be born to save the life of their current son, Charlie, then wouldn’t it be unfair to the child who has no say to how his life is being used by his brother?
Yes, besides the transfusions and injections, his life will still go on like a normal teenager. But won’t he feel like his life is being bounded to his brother?
When the child is born, he will have to suffer countless of pain. The pain will not be from his fall during soccer practices. Neither will it be the fight he had in class. In fact, it will be from the countless surgeries, transfusions and injections he has to undergo to help his brother, Charlie.
This is an issue of human rights.
The child is most likely to begin transfusions when he is still a baby and that is when he does not have the ability to decide if he wants to help his brother. From then, he will have to begin to get use to the frequent visits to the hospital in the future. Also, to create a life to save Charlie will involve the "selection" process, creating unlimited number of embryos until a "suitable" one is found and with the "unsuitable" ones presumably being destroyed.
Giving your life to save others is fine as long as you make the choice to do so. The second child in this case is having his entire fate forced upon it. I understand the mother’s agony to save her dearest son’s life, but I find their request unacceptable and unfair.
I reject their request to create a life to save a life. I believe that there are other solutions to the problem. But in any case, I propose they can still have a child by the means of in vitro fertilisation. However, the child borned can only begin to help his brother, Charlie, when he has the ability to make decisions.
I really want the Whitaker family to understand that the duties of the HFEA are not as easy as it seems. They consist of the regulation and inspection of all the clinics in UK that provides in vitro fertilisation, artificial insemination or the storage of human ova, sperm or embryoes. It is the dealing of lives, and we are largely responsible for any life that we allowed to be created unnaturally.
There are many concerns we have regarding the Whitaker family’s request, which is to create a life to save the life of their son, Charlie.
Should we allow another child to be born to save the life of their current son, Charlie, then wouldn’t it be unfair to the child who has no say to how his life is being used by his brother?
Yes, besides the transfusions and injections, his life will still go on like a normal teenager. But won’t he feel like his life is being bounded to his brother?
When the child is born, he will have to suffer countless of pain. The pain will not be from his fall during soccer practices. Neither will it be the fight he had in class. In fact, it will be from the countless surgeries, transfusions and injections he has to undergo to help his brother, Charlie.
This is an issue of human rights.
The child is most likely to begin transfusions when he is still a baby and that is when he does not have the ability to decide if he wants to help his brother. From then, he will have to begin to get use to the frequent visits to the hospital in the future. Also, to create a life to save Charlie will involve the "selection" process, creating unlimited number of embryos until a "suitable" one is found and with the "unsuitable" ones presumably being destroyed.
Giving your life to save others is fine as long as you make the choice to do so. The second child in this case is having his entire fate forced upon it. I understand the mother’s agony to save her dearest son’s life, but I find their request unacceptable and unfair.
I reject their request to create a life to save a life. I believe that there are other solutions to the problem. But in any case, I propose they can still have a child by the means of in vitro fertilisation. However, the child borned can only begin to help his brother, Charlie, when he has the ability to make decisions.
Posted by Tongwei @ |11:15 PM|