IVF technology debated

Experts this morning debated the good and bad of IVF technology during a conference organised by AZAD.

Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department director Mark Brincat said that the fact that there was no legislation did not mean that anything illegal was taking place

IVF was a normal procedure which had been carried out in line with the best medical practices for 20 years in Malta.

Regulation would, however, guarantee a more secure environment.

He said he would like to see IVF offered on the national health service for free, as was done in some other countries where up to three cycles of IVF were offered.

Prof. Brincat said that one had to look into the concept of freezing – not just of embryoes but also of stem cells.

Fertisiling did not always work and there was a lot of wastage. Women had to be given a 30 to 40 per cent success rate so at least two embryoes had to be implanted. A fallback position, such as freezing, was otherwise required as the success rate would otherwise be lowered to between five and 10 per cent.

Consultant neonatal pediatrician Paul Soler said that IVF had its limitations and any programme would result in a surplus of embryoes due to fertilisation in a laboratory.

There were three options for the surplus, all of which had ethical or morally serious issues.

There were to:

• Leave in a laboratory to die a natural death
• Transfer them all, putting the mother and child at risk
• Freeze the surplus.

The lesser evil, which was to freeze, should be chosen, he said.

The head of the University’s Theology Department, Rev. Prof. Emmanuel Agius said that no one questioned the need for legislation. The question was – in what form.

When medical experts spoke about the efficiency and safety for the mother and child, all made very valid arguments but one could not put fundamental values aside. Thedignity of the human being had to be respected.

The Oviedo Convention of the Council of Europe considered an embryo a human being. Some people saw it just as a mass of cells but “we believe it should be given max protection which has always been case in Malta”.

One should always choose to safeguard the value and dignity of human life. When it came to human life, one should not be talking about choosing a lesser evil.

“We need to be listening to the inroads made in medical technology, such as oocyte vetrification, which is the freezing of the egg before it is fertilised,” he said.

The pioneer of IVF In Malta, Josie Muscat, said that self-regulation existed in Malta. He pointed out that when embryoes were thawed, 75 per cent were not good for use. The reality was that only three per cent of couples used IVF and this had to be kept in mind when one regulated.

The head of the Department of Anatomy, Prof. Pierre Schembri Wismayer, said that emotions should not come into the values attached to life, which should be protected from the very beginning.

Health Minister Joe Cassar said that as soon as the Social Affairs Committee concluded its meetings on the topic, a law should be enacted.

He said that as a psychiatrist and on a personal level what worried him were peoples’ emotions.

“I look at human beings not institutions. We need to respect couples’ decisions,” he said.

Dr Cassar said that a couple could decide not to have children, they could decide to adopt, or they could decide to opt for technology.

“As a government, we’re all for regulation of technology,” he said.

He pointed out that oo If they decide not to have children, we cannot impose anything of them. Other adopt, others choose tech, as a government we’re all out for regulation of technology.

Not true that oocyte vetrification was not experimental as it had become so advanced in the past two years that certain countries had also introduced it on their national health service.

Bioethics Consultative Committee Chairman Michael Asciak said that one could not lose sight of the patient. He also spoke in favour of oocyte vetrification and said that one should look ahead.

Theologian Peter Serracino Inglott said that he was not against the freezing of embryoes.

However, there was the temptation to freeze more than necessary and the Church was against. However, one should not prohibit embryo freezing because of this temptation. One had to look at the impact on society, he said.