More Balance Needed In Review On Embryo Research
Sydney Morning Herald
Friday December 23, 2005
THE Lockhart report into the cloning and embryo research laws is so extreme that it is irrelevant ("Ministers split on judge's green light to clone embryos", December 20). It does not represent community views.
Numerous surveys have confirmed that most Australians, while supporting the use of excess IVF embryos, oppose creating embryos solely for research purposes. This is the position taken by the National Health and Medical Research Council and the federal, state and territory parliaments.The committee's effort to re-define the beginning of life is arbitrary and unconvincing. No one is likely to be fooled by definitions based on sheer research pragmatism rather than the scientific facts.Research undertaken by the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute indicates that a large majority of Australians, though accepting abortion on demand, also recognise the scientific reality that human life begins at fertilisation, which is when the sperm and the egg fuse to form one cell, not a day later as suggested by the committee.The proposal to allow the formation of human-animal hybrids is repugnant to most people. The committee recommends that scientists be permitted to form embryos by fusing human cells with animal eggs, or by fertilising an animal egg with human sperm.This recommendation is completely without regard to the seriousness with which the parliaments treated this matter, declaring it to be an offence and allocating heavy criminal penalties.The report reflects the unrepresentative nature of the committee and the desire on the part of each premier to appoint to the committee someone in favour of cloning research. The result was that there was simply no balance in the composition, and opposing views were unrepresented. The questions should be asked why the established process of review on these matters by the Australian Health Ethics Committee, which is a more representative committee, was bypassed.A fear now is that the Council of Australian Governments will seek to draft legislation without proper review or discussion and then use their majorities and a spirit of uniformity across the states and territories to foist it onto the Australian community.The decent processes of democracy need to be applied to these issues, but only after there has been a close examination of the issues by a more representative and objective committee.There is a need for a balanced parliamentary review of the legislation so that it can be examined in a more representative way. Dr Nicholas Tonti-Filippini Lower Templestowe (Vic)
© 2005 Sydney Morning Herald