Proceeding contribution from Bishop of St Albans (Bishops (affiliation)) in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 January 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL].
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL]
My Lords, this legislation is based on the promotion of equality and on a concept of non-discrimination. I wish we could rescue the word ““discrimination””. Its current use seems to imply the exercise of prejudice against other people based on stereotyping, which of course is appalling. I want to reinstitute ““discrimination”” as meaning coming to a careful and fine judgment based on the use of reason and through reflection on experience. It goes without saying that I, in common with other Members of your Lordships’ House, recognise the abilities and commitment of many single parents. I do so from my own personal perspective. When my mother died as a result of very serious medical negligence, my father brought me up alone for a couple of years before he happily remarried, and he was quite outstanding. It also goes without saying that I recognise entirely the abilities and commitment of many single-sex couples, as spoken about so eloquently and with such passion, compassion and truthfulness as the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, brought to our debate. But it does not logically follow that a phrase about including the need of that child for a father is discriminatory. It is a statement in our legislative processes about the general recognition that in an ideal world, most children need good fathers and good mothers. What does the omission signal? I travel quite often by public transport. Like the rest of your Lordships’, I am bombarded with announcements. A man with a megaphone tells me that I am to keep my belongings with me at all times and that I must not smoke. I wonder what would happen if an announcement came across every station in London which said, ““In the interests of equality, people are reminded that children do not necessarily need fathers””. In other words, the omission is obviously going to be significant in what it signals to our society about the need for fathers. We can do that without in any sense being discriminatory and exercising prejudice based on stereotypes. That would be absolutely appalling. I support the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, in what I thought was a very telling remark. She pointed out that the public support for research and treatment is based on certain moral principles which are implicit but from time to time need to be explicit. Those moral principles include our understanding of what family life generally but not exclusively best includes. That is why I wish to support the amendment standing in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Deech.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 698 c70-1
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Children Civil partnerships Codes of practice Diagnosis Fertility Homosexuality Human rights Human embryo experiments Diseases Donors Genetics Ethics IVF Discrimination Fathers Parents Lone parents Research Stem cells Human-animal hybrid embryos
- Legislation
- Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:57:39 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_437651
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_437651
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_437651