---

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL]

I am grateful to the noble Lord and noble Earl for raising these issues. There is clearly widespread concern. The issue has vexed the HFEA now for a good number of years. Some years ago, we approved one application for a saviour sibling for a genetically inheritable disease. Then, we had another application for a disease in a sibling that was not genetic; we turned it down and then reconsidered it. It went backwards and forwards between the ethics and law committee and the HFEA. I say this to indicate to the noble Lord, Lord Alton, that the HFEA gives serious ethical consideration to these issues. However, I am glad that he and the noble Earl have raised the issue because I share a lot of their concerns. We need greater clarity from the Minister about what is meant by ““or other tissue””, as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd, emphasised. We also need much greater clarity about what is meant by ““serious””, if we are not going to use the phrase ““life-threatening””. As was said, the phrase ““life-threatening”” is reasonably clear. The main point that I want to make is slightly to dispel the impression made by the noble Lord, Lord Alton. All Members of this Committee would agree with the Kantian principle that we should never treat any other human being simply as a means to an end. That is fundamental to any ethical view. However, a woman who is having a baby in this situation probably has a range of motives. She is very unlikely to want to have another child purely for the purpose of helping a sick sibling. Her motives are much more likely to be mixed: a bit of one and a bit of the other. Quite a significant part of her will want another child for its own sake. The psychological effect on the baby who will be born has been mentioned. The noble Lord, Lord Alton, said that for the rest of its life it would be hanging over it that it had been brought into this world simply for another person. I suggest that the psychological effect could be the opposite: if as the result of the child’s bone marrow a child who was dying is alive, that would surely enhance the sense of the preciousness and value of that child and the gratitude for it within the family. If we suppose that the child had died and the parents had a new child because there was a gap in the family, what would the psychological effect of that be? The psychological effect—this is an unknown, and we are only speculating—is more ambiguous and could be much more positive than the noble Lord suggested. Overall, I am glad that the noble Lord and the noble Earl raised the matter. There are questions about the Bill, and it will probably have to be amended.