On the TV show Sellili on April 20, Mark Brincat, who is one of those who offer IVF in Malta, stated that he sees that there is a need for embryo freezing so as to have a “fall back” position. He specifically mentioned that he would need this “in case something happens to the mother en route to the clinic to have her embryos implanted”.
It is worth noting that Prof. Brincat did not mention what he has pointed out previously, that it was necessary for him to fertilise more than two embryos for him to attain the required legal number of two, which clinics will be allowed to implant.
We heard this same opinion echoed by at least two MPs in the social affairs committee. They had suggested that when generating embryos through IVF, at least one extra embryo should be formed so as to ensure having the required number of embryos (two) in the eventuality of one of them dying in the process leading to implantation.
The “extra” embryos are frozen – with inevitable stockpiling of unused embryos. The embryos that are considered of “lesser quality” are automatically selected for the freezer.
It seems that Prof. Brincat is now indicating that regular embryo freezing is no longer an issue for him. He seems to have now taken a similar position to that of the other IVF provider in Malta, Josie Muscat, who from the outset has always opposed embryo freezing.
IVF is inherently an unnatural procedure
Prof. Brincat now seems to be affirming that the only time he would need to make recourse to freezing the embryo is in certain (force majeure) moments. In the final Social Affairs Committee meeting held in 2011, the word that was actually used in place of force majeure was “impellent”.
By “impellent”, Gift of Life understands: those situations when the mother of the embryos becomes too ill to undergo implantation. These exceptional circumstances may include other unforeseen impediments such as accident or injury in transit to the fertility clinic to have her embryos implanted.
It cannot be denied that couples affected with infertility problems do suffer greatly. We cannot, however, allow this fact to distract us from the reality that IVF is inherently an inefficient, unnatural procedure. Justifying IVF has always been extremely difficult. Morally and ethically, many, including GOL feel that IVF goes contrary to pro-life culture.
Among our objections are the embryo losses and the problems that multiple births present. We have great difficulty with the concepts of embryo freezing and embryo selection, as well as many other radical artificial methods such as sperm donation and surrogacy – since all these run contrary to authentic pro-life values.
The government and the opposition however had already decided to regularise IVF even before the Gift of Life Foundation had been formed in 2004. We recognise therefore that having a law that regularises IVF is far better than having unregulated IVF.