Aditus Foundation calls for more in-depth debate on specific aspects of IVF Bill

Amendments to the Embryo Protection Act should be put on hold, pending a more in-depth, honest and inclusive consultation on specific aspects of the Bill, the Aditus Foundation said on Friday.

The Bill, which is currently being debated by parliament, has caused controversy since being announced, with people on both sides of the debate having deeply-rooted beliefs in favour or against the proposed changes.

Opponents have argued that the law does not respect the value of the unborn child’s life because it allows for embryo freezing. Further ethical questions have been raised on provisions in the Bill allowing surrogacy and gamete donation.

In a statement issued on Friday, the human rights NGO called on the minister to organise or facilitate the organisation of, public discussions and stakeholder meetings on specific aspects of the proposed legislation.

It added that by doing so, the government would be ensuring that the dignity and rights of prospective parents and future children were granted the highest form of legislative and social protection.

Welcome end to discrimination

The NGO it welcomed the fact that the Bill proposed to remove the discriminatory ban on access to medically assisted procreation by same-sex couples.

“The present legislation is tantamount to a law stating that homosexual persons are prohibited from using public transport and is, as such, a blatant violation of Malta’s Constitutional protection against discrimination.”

It said it was also positive that the Bill endorses the decriminalisation of sperm and egg donation, as it felt that this constituted an unjust interference of a person’s rights to physical integrity.

The statement added however that the proposed Bill in its present form raised extremely serious human rights concerns that cannot be dismissed.

Aditus emphasised that many of the Bill’s provisions lacked clarity as to their meaning, implications and future regulation. “It is impossible for the nation to endorse such an important law if it is unable to understand it’s most important provisions.”

Read more: An idiot’s guide to how Maltese IVF law will change

Ethical issues surrounding embryo adoption

In its current form the bill allows the Embryo Protection Authority to proceed with adoption if the parents of an embryo created through IVF decide not to renew the five-year certificate granted to parents to freeze embryos.

Once the adoption takes place, the original parents lose all rights on the embryo and are exempt from any obligation towards it.

Aditus said it was concerned at the possibility of embryos being adopted or donated. In addition to the complex social and ethical issues brought about by such a procedure, the NGO said that what was being proposed was tantamount to forced adoption.

“We are not convinced that the sensitive context within which these decisions will be taken, with extremely high levels of anxiety and stress, are conducive to the provisions of a truly free and informed consent,” it said.

“As such, we feel that is violates the parents’ right to found a family, the right to privacy and could also – in specific circumstances – amount to inhuman and degrading treatment.”

Suitability of Embryo Protection Authority

Furthermore, Aditus also questioned the suitability of adoption procedure and whether the Embryo Protection Authority in assessing whether prospective adoptive parents are suitable or eligible to adopt an embryo.

“Adoption of children is a strictly regulated regime that seeks to ensure – at all stages – the best interests of the child,” said the NGO.

It added that while adoption legislation stipulated clear eligibility criteria, assessment procedures and monitoring requirements, it was not clear that the Embryo Protection Authority and the “related protocol” could guarantee the best interests of the adopted embyros.

Read more: Hundreds protest proposed amendments to IVF laws

Lack of consultation on surrogacy

On surrogacy the NGO said that while it agreed with the practice in principle, a more in-depth consultation was required.

“This could be a legitimate pathway to parenthood for several couples, and we also endorse legislation and policy that acknowledges a woman’s physical and psychological autonomy. Yet out experiences with vulnerable and marginalised women – including women living in poverty, women involved in prostitution, migrant women and transgender women – requires us to adopt and advocate for an extremely cautious approach.”

Moreover, it pointed out that the regulations that are to govern the procedure had not been outlined in the law, with responsibility being shifted to ministerial regulations, which have not yet been made public.