HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYOLOGY BILL
The hunt is on. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HFEB) is about to reach Parliament and suddenly the Catholics in government are important. Media interviews seem to have flushed out unknown Catholics in the House, and for some of them this is a trying time. HFEB has started a debate about what is involved with stem cell research, with the creation of chimerae for the purposes of experimentation, with the abolition of fatherhood. This heady mix of science, morality and ethics has proved a little much for MPs who are already sweating over the discoveries made by the Freedom of Information Act about how they are swinging their expenses.
There is more to HFEB however. It threatens to raise a debate on what loyalty to a political party means and where it can take such loyalty. I got a good example of this in correspondence with members of the House of Lords and with MPs. I feel strongly about this matter and wrote to the Scottish Lords on January 8. This is what I wrote to them :
Dear
HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYO BILL
I would ask you that in the debate on the above Bill, you indicate your support for the amendment put forward by Lord Alton to ban animal-human, ‘inter-species’ embryos.
In my view this practice is inherently both wrong and degrading to human dignity. We talk much of human rights today and human rights and dignity start with the embryo. Embryonic stem cell research has not produced any treatments applicable to any disorder, while adult stem cell therapies have been used in over 70 treatments. Yet scientists and politicians are prepared to divert resources from adult stem cell research to the creation of interspecies embryos which with a fourteen day life span have no uses, a procedure which has created unease among the public and is the killing of a human being.
On this issue, the enthusiasm of scientists for experimentation has influenced Government which proposed to ban such a procedure but changed its mind. I doubt if scientists represent the views of the general public in this matter.
Again, I would ask you to support Lord Alton’s amendment and would be grateful, if you feel you cannot, if you could let me know what factors swayed you against doing so.
Yours sincerely
Out of 70 letters sent, I received 9 replies. Most of these were in postcard form, mere acknowledgements that my letter had been received. Alton's attempted amendment, intended to remove the chimerae clause was overwhelmingly defeated.
There is more to HFEB however. It threatens to raise a debate on what loyalty to a political party means and where it can take such loyalty. I got a good example of this in correspondence with members of the House of Lords and with MPs. I feel strongly about this matter and wrote to the Scottish Lords on January 8. This is what I wrote to them :
Dear
HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYO BILL
I would ask you that in the debate on the above Bill, you indicate your support for the amendment put forward by Lord Alton to ban animal-human, ‘inter-species’ embryos.
In my view this practice is inherently both wrong and degrading to human dignity. We talk much of human rights today and human rights and dignity start with the embryo. Embryonic stem cell research has not produced any treatments applicable to any disorder, while adult stem cell therapies have been used in over 70 treatments. Yet scientists and politicians are prepared to divert resources from adult stem cell research to the creation of interspecies embryos which with a fourteen day life span have no uses, a procedure which has created unease among the public and is the killing of a human being.
On this issue, the enthusiasm of scientists for experimentation has influenced Government which proposed to ban such a procedure but changed its mind. I doubt if scientists represent the views of the general public in this matter.
Again, I would ask you to support Lord Alton’s amendment and would be grateful, if you feel you cannot, if you could let me know what factors swayed you against doing so.
Yours sincerely
Out of 70 letters sent, I received 9 replies. Most of these were in postcard form, mere acknowledgements that my letter had been received. Alton's attempted amendment, intended to remove the chimerae clause was overwhelmingly defeated.
As time has approached for the Commons debate of HFEB, I wrote the following to 38 Scottish Labour MPs, excluding the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House.
25.02.08
Dear
HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYOLOGY BILL
As you know, this Bill will be before you for debate in the coming weeks. Among its key areas for discussion are firstly, making provision for research on different types of embryos ; and secondly, proposing changes in definitions of legal parenthood. I would ask you to oppose both of these.
Our defence of human rights includes human dignity, starting with the embryo. No applicable treatment to any disorder through embryonic stem cell research has been discovered, while adult stem cell therapies have been used in over 70 treatments. I therefore would urge you to oppose any diverting of resources from adult stem cell research to the creation of interspecies embryos which with a fourteen day life span have no uses. This is a procedure which has created unease among the general public and ultimately is the killing of a human being.
We all know what the words ‘mother’, ‘father’ and ‘family’ mean. They are what you grew up with. This Bill effectively asks you to change the meaning of words to suit social trends and to eliminate ‘father’ from the vocabulary of the family. I ask you to resist this.
I realise that you may be subjected to the possibility of a whipped vote in the passage of this Bill through the House. However much you may feel loyal to party demands, I would ask you to deny the whip. The matters in hand are too serious to be lost in obedience to lockstep conformity.
Yours sincerely
38 letters were sent. I received 15 replies, 14 of which declined to answer, invoking Parliamentary protocol that forbids members to discuss matters with non-constituents. All referred my letter to my own MP who at the time of writing has not contacted me. One member did reply politely. None of this helped to induce confidence in dealing with elected members.
25.02.08
Dear
HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYOLOGY BILL
As you know, this Bill will be before you for debate in the coming weeks. Among its key areas for discussion are firstly, making provision for research on different types of embryos ; and secondly, proposing changes in definitions of legal parenthood. I would ask you to oppose both of these.
Our defence of human rights includes human dignity, starting with the embryo. No applicable treatment to any disorder through embryonic stem cell research has been discovered, while adult stem cell therapies have been used in over 70 treatments. I therefore would urge you to oppose any diverting of resources from adult stem cell research to the creation of interspecies embryos which with a fourteen day life span have no uses. This is a procedure which has created unease among the general public and ultimately is the killing of a human being.
We all know what the words ‘mother’, ‘father’ and ‘family’ mean. They are what you grew up with. This Bill effectively asks you to change the meaning of words to suit social trends and to eliminate ‘father’ from the vocabulary of the family. I ask you to resist this.
I realise that you may be subjected to the possibility of a whipped vote in the passage of this Bill through the House. However much you may feel loyal to party demands, I would ask you to deny the whip. The matters in hand are too serious to be lost in obedience to lockstep conformity.
Yours sincerely
38 letters were sent. I received 15 replies, 14 of which declined to answer, invoking Parliamentary protocol that forbids members to discuss matters with non-constituents. All referred my letter to my own MP who at the time of writing has not contacted me. One member did reply politely. None of this helped to induce confidence in dealing with elected members.
The reactions of some Catholic MPs - opposition to Cardinal O'Brien's attack on HFEB, their own support for HFEB - is bound to raise some possible heartburning questions for our hierarchy. They should start soon to ask themselves about the levels of moral knowledge among people who state that they are Catholics, but appear to have little understanding of what this means. Much more important is the question of how they are going to deal with this.
posted by JPK | 5:06 pm
|
0 comments
