Row brews in clinic as woman seeks to have brother's baby
A British clinic was at the centre of controversy today for considering helping an infertile woman to have her brother’s child through artificial insemination.
Pressure groups accused the regulatory body the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) of authorising an ‘‘incestuous’’ procedure.
The woman, who is 47 and believed to be a doctor, is undergoing assessment at the Bridge Centre in London and discussions with the HFEA should be concluded in the next few weeks, the clinic’s director said.
The Sunday Times reported that the women is using a donor egg but it is not known whether she has a partner who could have fathered the child.
The pressure group Comment on Reproductive Ethics said the HFEA was ‘‘rapidly turning into a rubber-stamp organisation incapable of saying ‘no’’’.
A spokeswoman said: ‘‘In granting a licence for fraternal fertilisation, a procedure considered incestuous throughout human history, once again the HFEA shows itself to be an organisation without will power or clout.
‘‘It makes complete nonsense of UK regulations which are supposed to place the welfare of the child in a paramount position.’’
The case follows the controversy in June surrounding Frenchwoman Jeanine Salomone, 62, who gave birth to a child conceived using a donor egg fertilised with the sperm of her brother Robert, 52.
The actions of the siblings, from Frejus in southern France, were denounced as ‘‘horrendous’’ by pro-life campaigners after reports that the pair wanted the baby to secure a £2m inheritance.
Ms Salomone, who gave birth to Benoit David in France on May 14, was artificially inseminated at a Los Angeles clinic and reportedly told doctors there that her brother was her husband to secure IVF treatment.
The Comment on Reproductive Ethics spokeswoman said the British case was similar to that of the Salomones - ‘‘the only difference being that that fertilisation was not performed with Government approval.
‘‘In fact the French authorities, along with most of the world, expressed outrage at what had taken place in the private fertility sector in the USA,’’ she said.
‘‘The HFEA, on the other hand, was fully aware of the facts, and yet gave authorisation. The combined wisdom of history and the outrage of the world is not enough to halt this irresponsible quango, which is rapidly turning into a rubber-stamp organisation incapable of saying ‘no’.
‘‘It is clearly time for the Government to stop singing the praises of the HFEA and take a closer look at their actual track record. The public should demand a complete overhaul of the structure and remit of this group, before they are let loose on stem cell research and human cloning.’’
Professor Jack Scarisbrick, national chairman of the pro-life charity LIFE, said: ‘‘It’s horrible, and yet another example of how the natural order of procreation is being undermined.
‘‘We go further and further down the slippery slope.
‘‘The HFEA, I believe, says it can’t stop it, because it’s not strictly unlawful. That shows what a feeble body and toothless organisation the HFEA is.
A spokeswoman for the HFEA insisted, though, that the organisation had not authorised the procedure to take place.
‘‘We are not in a position to give authorisation,’’ she said.
‘‘The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act of 1990 specifically states that no category of woman can be excluded from treatment, but the welfare of the child has to be taken into account.
‘‘For us to have the authority to say yes or no would require a change to the Act, and that is up to Parliament, and not us.
