IVF treatment availability will be limited to married or “stable” heterosexual couples due to ethical concerns – not to shut out single-parent or gay-couple families, Justice Minister Chris Said has said.
What happens if the prospective mother passes away before her embryo can be implanted? Or what if she changes her mind at the 11th hour?
In an interview with The Sunday Times, Dr Said insisted delays in releasing the Bill were justified and the proposed law had been unanimously approved at a PN parliamentary group meeting attended by “the vast majority” of MPs.
If passed, the draft Bill will regulate a hitherto-uncontrolled sector and make costly IVF treatment – currently only available at private clinics – free at Mater Dei Hospital.
But only married or “stable” heterosexual couples will be allowed the treatment, with the interpretation of “stable” left to an independent regulatory authority to be set up in the coming months.
Dr Said said this was to prevent egg or sperm donation.
“To do that means you need to have a heterosexual couple, who’ll then be the baby’s parents. A single mother would need a sperm donor. A gay couple would need a donor too,” he said.
The government wanted an IVF baby to be the “the result of its prospective parents,” he continued.
“Allowing donors opens the door to all sorts of abuse, from having anonymous donations to people aiming for a baby with specific physical characteristics, for instance. We didn’t really delve into the issue of IVF adoption for gay couples.”
The government first signalled its intent to provide the reproductive treatment when it included a then-state-of-the-art IVF clinic while building Mater Dei Hospital.
That was 2004. The therapy is set to become publicly available next year – nine years after the clinic was built. How could the government justify the delay?
“The consultation process took years,” Dr Said conceded. “But remember, it’s a highly sensitive topic and several thorny issues needed to thrashed out before we could present a Bill.”
But did Parliament need three separate MP-led committees – one headed by Clyde Puli in the last legislature, and another two led by Edwin Vassallo and Jean-Pierre Farrugia, to assess the issue?
“Yes,” Dr Said insisted. “The committee led by Mr Vassallo looked at the ethical and moral issues around IVF, while the Farrugia Commission was a more technical one.”
Scientific progress had also played a part in muddling the matter, he added.
“The science around IVF was changing as we were consulting, which meant we were constantly updating things. It also meant that some problems dissipated.”
The draft Bill seeks to address the most prominent of those problems – what to do with excess embryos – by snap-freezing eggs instead, with doctors only allowed to fertilise two eggs at any one time.
Snap-freezing eggs, or oocyte vitrification, is a relatively new technology that has gained credence over recent years.
Not all medical minds are convinced by the idea but the government is confident it will be successful.
“We consulted with experts from all over the world. The science is there – it will work.”
Dr Said explained: “We set out from a simple premise: the sacrosanct need to safeguard human life from the moment of conception.
“That principle is absolute, which is why embryo freezing is prohibited except for the most exceptional circumstances.”
The Nationalist Party’s parliamentary group had agreed on the draft law’s principles, the minister continued. The “healthy” discussion between government MPs was attended by “the vast majority” of MPs, he said.
“One concern raised was that the draft law might be too restrictive, but when I explained the way we envisaged it to work, everyone was happy to subscribe to it.”
Whether the Church will be happy with the law remains to be seen, although as Maltese bishops issued a pastoral letter condemning IVF as “morally wrong”, it is unlikely to be celebratory.
“We agree completely with the Church’s concern for safeguarding human life, but as legislators we have a duty to legislate for all society.
“I think the draft Bill addresses many concerns mentioned in the pastoral letter,” the minister said.
He insisted that although Church committees were among stakeholders consulted during the drafting process, no one had seen the final draft before it was published.
The pastoral letter was issued just 24 hours before the draft Bill was launched for public consultation. Couldn’t the bishops have waited to read it before their condemnation?
“I’m assuming the bishops had no way of knowing we were going to be publishing the Bill then, though we’ve had this day in mind for the past 10 days or so.”
So the letter’s timing was a coincidence? Dr Said smiled: “Yes, I think so.”
IVF’s most controversial facet, embryo freezing, will be explicitly prohibited by the new law – with some exceptions.
“You need to provide for emergency scenarios,” the minister explained. “What happens if the prospective mother passes away before her embryo can be implanted? Or what if she changes her mind at the 11th hour?”
In such situations embryos would be frozen and put up for adoption, and Dr Said predicted demand would far outstrip supply.
“I’m no prophet, but I expect there to be far more parents willing to ‘adopt’ an embryo than there will be embryos available.”
IVF has been available in private clinics for more than two decades, but Dr Said reassured such clinics that the government had no intention of freezing out the private sector.
“They’ll be given time to align themselves to the new law and be licensed by the regulatory authority. It won’t happen overnight.”
With divorce already a local reality, IVF about to become one, a cohabitation Bill that has been on the verge of being published for almost a year and talk of drug law reform, some people could be forgiven for thinking Malta has been caught in a liberal wave.
Not so, Dr Said insisted.
“All these laws are simply responding to modern-day realities. It’s nothing to do with liberal waves. Realities change: if society remained static, there’d be no need to legislate for anything.”
For many couples desperate to have children, the IVF law was a case of better late than never.
Dr Said sighed. “Sometimes, time flies. Ten years are 10 years. Could the law have happened earlier? Possibly, but you have to look back and assess the government’s priorities at the time.
“For long stretches, the government was geared towards aligning itself with EU legislation, for example.
“But the issue isn’t whether it took too long or not but rather whether the proposed law is a successful one. And I think it is.”