Charities Commission Registration CC22512

Now that the PGD guidelines are confirmed, what was all the fuss about? - Commentary, 29 April 2005.

To read the words of some activists and commentators, you could be forgiven for thinking the end of civilisation was nigh as we went through the debates on guidelines for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, and the passing of the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Act. Now that the guidelines are in place here, you could be forgiven for wondering what all the fuss was about.

There are many couples in New Zealand who know they are at risk of having a child with severe disease and disability, and they are absolutely delighted that new prevention measures can now take place here through our fertility clinics. A huge burden of stress is being lifted from those families.

At the other side of the world, the British Law Lords are reported today (29 April 2005), to have finally given approval for a British couple to use PGD procedures in the hope of having a HLA matching baby for a very sick child they already have. The Hashmi’s ordeal has been drawn out for a considerable time by the actions of those who sought to stop them, reflecting to some extent the considerable delay in getting PGD guidelines in place here in New Zealand, because of seemingly endless criticism by opponents.

On close scrutiny, the arguments of opponents on both sides of the world lacked clarity and a sound basis for setting policy. It can even be argued quite coherently that their approach was eugenic, to the extent that they made judgements and attempted to direct and control the choices of others to fit with those judgements.

It is sad to see the progress of this wonderfully empowering technology being delayed and frustrated by those who attempt to impose their own views on others. Let us hope their views are now well relegated and that we can move on into a new era in control of some serious and devastating conditions.

But there is still one vital issue not yet decided about PGD - Will our government pay for the procedure for at-risk couples? We certainly hope a budget announcement will soon give the go-ahead for government funding. It would in some way compensate those who have had to endure the long delays, and provide for equity with current funding of fertility treatments.

John Forman
Executive Director