Professional group to lobby against embryo freezing
Doctors, social workers and health professionals have formed a group to lobby against the freezing of embryos.
The Professionals Against Embryo Freezing - as the group is called - said today that it was disappointed by the recommendations of a parliamentary committee, which, it said, was calling for the setting up of a national embryo freezing service.
Group head Dr Miriam Sciberras, a dentist, and committee member Pierre Schembri Wismayer, head of the Anatomy Department at the University, insisted that human life started at conception and the embryo therefore was human life which should not be frozen.
You do not go about freezing your friends, Dr Schembri Wismayer said to stress his point.
While it was being claimed that freezing embryos would reduce costs and discomfort for women who sought IVF treatment to bear children, Dr Schembri Wismayer said there could be no price on human life.
"The freezing of embryos is a offence against human life at its most vulnerable. It exposes the embryos to harm and death," the group said.
Experience abroad showed that where embryo freezing was available, an excessive amount of embryos was produced and many embryos were discarded or did not survive thawing, the group added.
"Presently, in Malta, all embryos produced by IVF are implanted, so as to give them an equal chance to develop fully. We as a lobby group which values human life from its very beginning, strongly reiterates that the IVF legislation now under discussion should continue to affirm this practice," Dr Schiberras said.
Nationalist MP Jean Pierre Farrugia, who headed the committee which recommended that embryo freezing should be permitted, said earlier this month that he would be allocating part of his MP honoraria rise towards fiscal incentives to encourage couples to implant or adopt frozen human embryos left over after IVF treatment, a position which drew criticism from the group Gift of Life. It described the proposal to permit embryo freezing as unethical.
Dr Farrugia argued that embryo freezing was medically beneficial for two reasons: It prevented the implantation of multiple embryos in the womb, which may result in higher risk multiple pregnancies, and it avoided the need to have to stimulate the woman’s ovaries by hormones to harvest the ova.
GIFT OF LIFE WELCOMES NEW GROUP
In a statement, Gift of Life welcomeD the formation of the ’Professionals Against Embryo Freezing’.
"we are absolutely delighted that a group of professionals, armed also with scientific, ethical and medical backgrounds has now formed in the defense of human life from the objectionable practice of freezing.
"There was always the danger that people in general would not recognize the clear dangers presented by the recommendations made by the select committee, in favor of the freezing of human embryos as part of regular IVF treatment," GOL said
"This group has organized itself at a very critical moment in our country’s history."
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
34 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
adrian galea
Jan 21st 2011, 01:14
What if i put it to you that freezing such embryos is one way where a couple avoids them being discarded, and therefore a way to give the gift of life to as many children as possible, giving all embryos a chance?
Would anyone of these professionals be able to look a child born through IVF and embryo freezing in the eye and state that he or she has no right to be alive?
The debate simply seems to focus on negative issues and can look somewhat extreme. Such broad sweeping views simply brush over the delicate sensitivities, the pain the hard choices couples involved in such processes have to think and anguish over.
I hope and trust that such professionals are taking the trouble to talk to as many people involved in suchprocesses as possible and gain a deeper understanding.
I am afraid nothing about medicine is natural. Some of the objections rasied about IVF prtocesses and embryo freezing would easily apply to many other medical interventions and we, including myself as a doctor, could be better off staying at home.
K Cassar
Jan 21st 2011, 16:55
Adrian you like many others seem to have missed the point. Nobody is saying that a child born through IVF or even having been frozen when an embryo does not have the right to be alive. What is being said is precisely that EACH embryo HAS the right to life and the right NOT to have its life suspended in the frozen state with the accompanying risks of harm or death. Futhermore this technique will carry with it the risk of SURPLUS embryos... What research shows that Maltese couples will prefer to adopt an embryo rather than a child?
Stephanie Bezzina Wettinger
Jan 20th 2011, 23:09
Something else I can't help pointing out is that the report of the parliamentary committee presents an anomaly which may very well have legal implications: on the one hand it is fine to freeze embryos, on the other hand embryos can be put up for adoption. We don't put objects or cells for adoption, we put human individuals up for adoption. If the embryo is granted the status of a human individual, how can you agree to keep it frozen?
Stephanie Bezzina Wettinger
Jan 20th 2011, 23:03
Freezing of embryos involves risks. The embryos are stored in straws that can crack resulting in loss of the embryos. There is also a risk of mislabelling the straws or of the labels wearing off or not being clear enough. A straw amongst many straws can simply get lost or misplaced in the tank where they are kept. The embryos must be kept at very low temperatures - around -135 degrees Celcius. This is done by keeping the straws in liquid nitrogen which must be regularly and frequently topped up because it evaporates. There is a risk that the nitrogen evaporates off, or the dewar tank develops a fault, or the nitrogen supply does not arrive on time. This would mean that all the embryos in that tank are no longer viable. These are realities. If the procedure is publicly funded who will be liable if embryos are accidentally lost?
On a more positive note, whilst until some years ago oocyte (egg) freezing did not give a good success rate, there is recent scientific literature (2009, 2010) which indicates that it is now proving successful. Whilst may be it is early days, this would solve a number of issues.
Jean-pierre Farrugia
Jan 20th 2011, 21:37
Patronising rhetoric will not change the fact that recommendations were not made by MPs, GPs, pathologists, dentists or theologians but by the heads of the Obstetrics and Neonatology Departments at Mater Dei - corroborated by a CANA counsellor who went through it all herself and the Child Commission/er.
The Committee that was presented with 50 documents in 11 public online meetings from February to October presented its report based on which Cabinet will propose a Bill to Parliament where it can be shred to pieces without any misgivings from my end to start with.
Meanwhile I tabled a few PQs which may be relevant:
1. Only dead foetuses weighing more than 500g and more than 22 weeks are reported - for me this is "totally unacceptable";
2. Through 2008-2010 there were more than 1000 miscarriages at Mater Dei only - confirming that embryos are always at risk even when singleton in utero;
3. Through 1995-2010 there were 166 new cases of Cerebral Palsy - my main concern;
4. Through 2007-2010 149 babies were adopted - some from abroad costing parents €35000.
I respect your opinions as ethically who am I to judge?!
C.Brincat
Jan 20th 2011, 20:32
This is pure self interest!
A selective thing!
WE decide which life forms are sacred?
Just to kill the rest?
Get out of here!
"A critical moment in our country's hypocrisy! "
James DeGaetano
Jan 20th 2011, 18:42
Jean Pierre, the fact that we have a problem with multiple births from IVF, or ovarian hyperstimulation for that matter, means that IVF needs to be adequately regulated and not the introduction of a procedure that is even more controversial and which will inevitably result in frozen embryos being discarded. This is totally unacceptable.
Albert, your comments are very disappointing and befuddled. You cannot lump a whole host of totally diverse issues together. This is a very particular issue which is related to destruction of life at it's earliest stage and which is invariably a byproduct of embryo freezing.
Josef Laspina
Jan 20th 2011, 18:11
I think that just like in the case of aborted foetuses we should pass a bill / law in parliament ensuring the right to be aborted and the right to be frozen, which is a definite must in our modern age - we must empower the individual and allow the said individual to choose for him or herself whether he / she wants to be aborted or frozen - age is no concern - anyone can get frozen or aborted - however the bill must state that the aborted person should be of enough age to understand the conditions he / she is being subjected to. I am not joking, I am serious about this bill !!!
Jean-pierre Farrugia
Jan 20th 2011, 17:47
I can assure our colleagues that Dr. Frans Agius, Dr. Michael Farrugia and myself spent 9 months deliberating about this delicate issue and that for all three of us it was all about shouldering responsibility and not at all about rushing in where angels feared to tread!
I have it from the horse's mouth that in the interval of 2 weeks this month the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit had to cater for the simultaneous admission of 6 extremely premature babies of 24 weeks gestation resulting from artificial multifetal gestation that unfortunately can only be avoided by improving IVF success rates by repeating the procedure using a minimal number of frozen embryos rather than introducing all 3 or 4 embryos at once.
M Vella
Jan 20th 2011, 18:52
"multifetal gestation that unfortunately can only be avoided by improving IVF success rates...." would it also be controlled if Clomid were to stop being prescibed?
albert leone ganado
Jan 20th 2011, 17:16
Here we go again on another issue pitching liberal rationalists against conservative traditional Catholics totally detached from the current European enlightened humanist freedoms. One of the reasons why I think that the divorce issue cannot have a quick resolution is that it cannot be seen in isolation. I have no doubt that the future points to an outcome where we Maltese will be emancipated and achieve a raft of new civil liberties and human rights which Europeans have long enjoyed. In the next few years I am sure there will be a radical change of attitude especially amongst the young population regarding the Maltese moral and ethical mindset and we will see alignment with the European one on a number of important issues.. In particular one thinks of such issues as divorce, censorship, freedom of expression, the morning after pill, in vitro fertilisation issues and other bioethical and environmental freedoms.
David Farrugia
Jan 20th 2011, 17:09
The setting up of such lobby groups help me identify the fundamentalists and regressive members of my society. It helps me choose the right leaders whom to vote for in the future. Thanks.
jcamilleri
Jan 20th 2011, 23:18
So you label fundamentalists and regressive those persons who you disagree with. This tells lots about your good self, my friend. Why should not you step forward and lead your group to promote your progressive and liberal ideas for our communities? I'm sure you will have followers.
mario azzopardi
Jan 20th 2011, 17:01
We are presently inundated with triplets and twins through IVF at a huge cost to human life. Simple maths would show that these IVF could cost us between 100000 euros (yes one hundred thousand euros!!!) and 200000 euros each if they are born extremely prematurely. We need to have a national policy on IVF and regulation of IVF. Added to this this causes overcrowding at SCBU . Any thoughts on this matter from MUMN??
Joe Zammit
Jan 20th 2011, 16:29
Instruction Dignitas Personae, p.18 states:
"Cryopreservation is incompatible with the respect owed to human embryos; it presupposes their production in vitro; it exposes them to the serious risk of death or physical harm, since A HIGH PERCENTAGE DOES NOT SURVIVE the process of freezing and thawing; it deprives them at least temporarily of maternal reception and gestation; it places them in a situation in which they are susceptible to further offense and manipulation.
The majority of embryos that are not used remain “orphans”. Their parents do not ask for them and at times all trace of the parents is lost. This is why there are thousands upon thousands of frozen embryos in almost all countries where in vitro fertilization takes place."
Christian Sciberras
Jan 21st 2011, 08:56
Ah, read directly from an UNBIASED SOURCE I presume??!?!
Mark Grima
Jan 20th 2011, 16:08
Dr Schembri Wismayer - "You do not go about freezing your friends".
A classic case of the pious spouting nonsense to get the rationally-challenged on their side.
malcolm seychell
Jan 20th 2011, 15:52
kemm nifilhu inkunu kretini. This is the future.
Joe Grima Brussels
Jan 20th 2011, 16:55
What, exactly, is 'the future' for you? Presently we have two realities: some pressing for abortion, and others pressing for freezing embryos for future 'use'! Both are abusing of our 'power'! We try to do anything, but let nature work the way it was created to work! Is THAT your 'future'? And YOU call OTHERS cretini!!!!
Stanley Busuttil
Jan 20th 2011, 15:27
Dr Sciberras's standpoint comes from a wrongly-principled moral stand. After all, morality (especially of the misguided type) is from morons as much as electricity is from electrons.
What Dr Scibberras wants is to deprive women and families who due to their career pressures could not have any children before their biological clock stops ticking.
Norman Lowell
Jan 20th 2011, 15:04
Disgraceful!
Through the freezing of embryos, we could upbreed -
strive to ever Higher Forms of Life.
Breed Mozarts, Einsteins, Marconis - breed healthy childre:
Higher Forms of Life that embellish, are a tribute to Nature.
Through embryo freezing we could populate distant stars -
millions of miles away, light years away.
Stop your foolishness!
Kevin Saliba
Jan 20th 2011, 17:25
Mur oqrod Norman. :)
J Borg
Jan 20th 2011, 17:54
Norman, perhaps we could also re-create Peter Pan, and Tom Thumb! What about Cinderella?
Ramon Casha
Jan 20th 2011, 14:58
What do dentists have to do with IVF???
R Abela
Jan 20th 2011, 16:02
Exactly! No doubt all of these professionals have been blessed with children and have absolutely no idea what it's like to go through infertility.
Joe Grima Brussels
Jan 20th 2011, 16:18
Embryo freezing is tempering with what is natural, normal, and haromious, do obviously, Ramon is in favour. Nothing new!!
So, one day you are in favour of abortion, to get rid of the 'extra, unwanted babies', and on the next you want to freeze embryos for future 'use'!!!!! Anything which is rebellious, or against normality! You send a very clear message! Hawwadni ha nifmek!
Raphael Vassallo
Jan 20th 2011, 17:07
Antibiotics tamper with what is natural, too. As does any form of surgery. In fact, if nature were the only yardstick by which all things were judged, people would be expected to die of the simplest and most treatable of infections. If they don't, it is precisely because medical science has tampered with "what is natural, normal and harmonious", to everyone's benefit.
Incidentally, nature also spontaneously aborts more foetuses each year than clinics would be capable of aborting in a decade... that;s right: the same 'nature' you seem to suddenly think is worth emulating.
I would be more careful what i wish for if i were you, Mr Grima Brussels.
Joe Grima Brussels
Jan 20th 2011, 17:42
Don't try to be too wise, Raphael. I never mentioned illnesses. That's a rather childish, silly argument!! Curing an ailment is one thing, tempering with the normal course of life is another! We try to interrupt or manipulate nature (for your benefit: except in illnesses), by killing what has been created, while on the other hand freezing for future 'use'! Can you decide? Do you want babies to be born, or to use as targets?
Yes, nature has it's own way of aborting an unborn child,...but does that mean that we are free to KILL those we choose? Nature also has a way to terminate ALL OF US, when our time comes! Does THAT give you a free hand to KILL anyone you want????
Yes, you'd better be more careful in what you believe!
Stanley Busuttil
Jan 20th 2011, 18:36
Joe Grima,
Raphael has a very valid point. He is not being too wise ... just way wiser than you.
Your line of argumentation does not hold, so stop trying to play the role of the wise person when you are not
N Zahra
Jan 20th 2011, 20:30
But Mr Grima - that's exactly the point. The reason that this procedure is being suggested is precisely because some people who want to become parents are suffering from an ailment that prohibits them from having children!
Philip Hili
Jan 20th 2011, 14:48
To the committee which recommended that embryo freezing should be permitted:-
Wise doctors, let nature takes its course and do not use your wisdom given to you by the Creator in order to do something that the Creator is against of. Do not fiddle with nature because history showed that every human being who fiddled with nature, he was the loser and nature always won.
Philip Hili
Jan 20th 2011, 16:22
@ Ramon Casha.
What a silly question!!!!!
If by your reasoning you are questioning the interest shown by a dentist in this issue, so by the same argument ( reasoning) what do you say if a lay person - "cikku l-poplu" shows interest in this subject and expresses his/her disapproval in this matter - IVF?
N Zahra
Jan 20th 2011, 16:57
The way you reason, we might as well not even use penicillin 'as it would interfere with God's plan' or whatever! I'll tell you what God said - he told us to use our talents to their fullest. There are people with problems and there are other people with brains trying to find solutions to these problems.
Besides - what's all this about a couple of cells? I always hear the same argument - that if it were me I wouldn't be here. But I always think to myself, if I wasn't here, I jolly well couldn't miss myself could I?
Raphael Vassallo
Jan 20th 2011, 17:57
Let nature take its course, and appendicitis victims would die of peritonitis 99% of the time. Infant mortality would skyrocket, women would regularly die in childbirth, and human life expectancy would generally revert to around 35-40 years - as in fact it used to be, when Man was still bound to the natural weal. Is this what you want?