Proceeding contribution from Patrick Hall (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 19 May 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
Does not bone marrow biopsy already take place? The point has been made that that is not with the informed consent of the child, but it could not be because a child is not of legal majority. None the less, such procedures already take place to try to help a sibling, so what is the difference in principle? If a child were created partly for that purpose—it would also be because they were wanted—that bone marrow could not be removed for at least a year after they were born, so what is the difference from existing procedure?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 476 c100
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children Clones Animals Congenital abnormalities Fertility Licensing Human embryo experiments Diseases Donors Genetics Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Ethics IVF Foetal tissue Medical treatments Relatives 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 02:13:56 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474248
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474248
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474248