The power of interest groups to force change is apparent in proposals leading up to the Human Tissue and Embryos (Draft) Bill, say Rachel Fenton and Fiona Dabell
In March 2005 the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee published its review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (HFEA 1990), which was branded as “ultra-libertarian” by critics and signed by only half the MPs. Among its recommendations were: sex selection for family balancing should be allowed; hybrid and chimera embryos should be permitted to be created for research purposes; and the absolute ban on genetic modification of the pre-14 day embryo should be lifted. Significantly, it recommended that the “welfare of the child” provision and in particular the “need for a father” under HFEA 1990, s 13(5) should be abolished in its current form on the grounds that it is “unjustifiably offensive” and “wrong for legislation to imply that unjustified discrimination against ‘unconventional families’ is acceptable”.
In 2005 the Department of Health (DoH) launched a public consultation for
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
