Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 20 May 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HC) and Debate on bill on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].


Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]

I am keen to finish my speech, because others wish to speak. I have spoken to clinicians about what the Bill will mean, and I want to reinforce a point made by the Minister. Fortunately, the code of practice currently enables the need for a father provision to be dealt with in a relatively moderate way, but if we voted for a requirement for clinics to observe a need for a father provision, they would have to apply the test to every single group of people in order not to discriminate. John Parsons at King's College hospital has said that in eight years he and his colleagues have conducted 8,000 treatment cycles with 6,000 patients. Going through a detailed role model test with 6,000 patients would be a huge burden. I ask those Members who support either of the amendments in question why they want to introduce a measure that could be unfair, and at best would be ineffective and bureaucratic. That is not the right thing to do. The Committee should support the Bill as it stands.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
476 c203 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Children's rights Abortion Cohabitation Absent parents Counselling Women Fertility Homosexuality Human rights Human embryo experiments Eligibility IVF Discrimination Fathers Parents Married people Single people Women's rights
Legislation
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk