News

Reproduction and Responsibility: the Regulation of New Biotechnologies

The recommendations of this report represent an important step forward in what has been an ongoing and contentious set of debates. We are pro-choice advocates who support both assisted reproduction for people who are infertile and embryo stem cell research, and who have concerns about the unregulated and commercialized atmosphere in which these technologies are being used. This report is a positive development because:

• It recommends putting women and children at the center of concern of policies regarding the assisted reproduction industry. Focusing on the well-being of children, as well as on the services provided to adults who are infertile, will make a critical difference in distinguishing practices that are reasonable and ethical from those that are not.
• It underscores the need for better research to define the risks of these new technologies. Without such data, women -the ones who most often undergo the risks involved - cannot make informed decisions. These risks have far too often been glossed over, even though many studies have called for more in-depth investigations.
• It documents why we need public oversight of assisted reproduction, a field that is much less regulated and more privatized than other areas of medical practice. Although most IVF practitioners are responsible and trustworthy, the voluntary standards set by trade associations such as the American Society for Reproductive Medicine have been inadequate.
• It contains language that effectively prohibits human reproductive cloning - a goal shared by the vast majority of Americans, as well as by many other countries that have already implemented prohibitions on human reproductive cloning.
• It recommends that the selling of human embryos be prohibited and that certain restrictions on the patenting of human embryos be made more explicit via legislation. This would allow an important public discussion about the commercial control of reproduction and health care.

Obviously, many key controversial issues are left unresolved. And there is always the possibility that the current administration will misuse or misapply the recommendations in this report, especially since so many recent actions by the Bush administration have been grounded in ideological beliefs that are harmful to women.

The core recommendations of this report are consistent with the values of pro-choice progressives and social justice advocates; indeed, they promote and affirm those values. The report demonstrates that when the stakes are high enough, individuals with philosophical, political, and religious disagreements can find ways to move forward together.

Canada’s new Assisted Human Reproduction Law, approved on Thursday, March 11 by the Canadian Senate, is perhaps the most significant legislation concerning genetic and reproductive technologies enacted by any country in recent years, according to experts at the Oakland, California-based Center for Genetics and Society (CGS). It provides a model for governing these technologies, they said, that could break the logjam blocking approval of such regulations in the United States.

“People differ about many things connected to sex and reproduction,” said CGS Associate Director Dr. Marcy Darnovsky, “but the Canadians were able to bridge those differences in a way that the United States has thus far not been able to do. They identified areas of broad consensus and then negotiated over remaining differences.”

The law establishes a new federal body, the Assisted Human Reproduction Agency of Canada (AHRAC), to oversee research and clinical applications involving human eggs, sperm and embryos. Labs and clinics wishing to do such work will have to be licensed by the AHRAC and subject to its regulations.

The new law allows research on donated human embryos not used during in vitro fertilization efforts, if informed consent has been granted, but prohibits the creation of new embryos specifically for research purposes. This includes creation of embryos by means of cloning.

“Canadian stem cell researchers supported this law because it establishes a reasonable framework allowing needed embryonic stem cell research to proceed,” said Dr. Darnovsky. “The law will be reviewed after three years, and if public support exists for changes, those can be made then.”

The new law also bans the use of techniques to select the sex of a baby for other than medical reasons, the use of cloning techniques to create a baby, the creation of “designer babies” by manipulating inheritable genes, the creation of human-animal chimeras, and the commercialization of eggs, sperm, and surrogacy services.

“It’s important to realize that the new law was based on extensive public hearings and meetings involving thousands of Canadians from all constituencies and walks of life,” said Richard Hayes, Executive Director of the Center for Genetics and Society. “That sort of broad citizens involvement has been absent from the polarized debate in the United States.”

“Some in the United States assume that if you’re a conservative you want all these technologies banned and if you’re a liberal you want them all allowed,” Hayes said. “But look at Canada. They’ve been pioneers on gay marriage, medical marijuana, national health care, and opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Hardly conservative. They put research cloning off-limits, at least for now, because they knew it was not necessary in order to allow stem cell research to continue, and because its development carries real risks.”

Many constituencies played key roles in building consensus for the new Canadian law, notably including the women’s health community. “Canadian women knew that they couldn’t trust the profit-driven fertility industry to regulate itself to avoid abusive and coercive practices,” said Dr. Darnovsky. “We believe American women will play an equally important role in securing strong regulations of new reproductive technologies here in the United States.”

Resources

Text of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/PDF/37/3/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-6_3.pdf

Key Background Documents:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/protection/reproduction/

Contact:

Jesse Reynolds
1-510-625-0819 x308