Only those struggling with infertility problems can truly understand the desperate yearn­ings for a child. Only they can really know the keening anguish of dashed hopes as month after month passes by without a succcessful pregnancy and as biological clocks tick ominously in the background.

Many of them undergo horribly invasive and painful IVF procedures that take their toll on the biological and financial front of those trying to conceive and bear a child.

In the face of such evident suffering, it seems insensitive – if not downright callous – not to welcome any process by which infertility treatment can be improved. It is for this reason that the prospect of embryo freezing has been seized upon as a forward-looking step in infertility treatment.

In very simplistic terms embryo freezing consists in the freezing of unused embryos after a cycle of IVF. The parents can choose to use the frozen embryos in later cycles or to donate them to others for treatment or alternative purposes. The advantages of having a readily “utilisable” embryo, instead of starting the IVF cycle from scratch is a very evident plus point in this scenario. At present Maltese law provides for the freezing of unfertilised oocytes (eggs) but not the freezing of embryos. The success rate of the treatments is claimed to be comparable by some, while others insist that embryo freezing is better.

The problems with classifying an embryo as a thing/commodity are very evident

The issue claimed centre stage in recent weeks when the women’s branch of the Labour Party proposed the introduction of embryo freezing to the inter-ministerial committee reviewing IVF legislation.

Joseph Muscat weighed in with his stand in favour of embryo freezing, saying it was motivated by the enlarged possibility this would give to prospective parents who have difficulty conceiving. Several pro-life organisations voiced concern about this because unless the implantation of all embryos is made mandatory, some embryos will necessarily have to be disposed of, which effectively is the snuffing out of human life.

Even at this stage of the discussion you can see the way things are shaping up – those supporting the freezing of embryos are adopting the mantle of hope and the reining in of technological and medical advances for the betterment of the human condition. And how can anyone object to that? Anybody who voices concern about the ethical or moral dilemmas associated with embryo freezing will be accused of insensitivity and of turning a blind eye to the undeniable suffering of those with infertility problems.

To put it very crudely, they will be seen as plumping for a bunch of cells as opposed to the happiness of an infertile couple. It’s a no-brainer, right? Except that it isn’t.

Those cells are the genetic blueprint of human life. As such, they should have a status that is different from all other things which can be disposed of, transferred and bartered at will.

Even if you do not subscribe to the “sacredness” of the human embryo concept, the problems with classifying the embryo as a thing/commodity are very evident in the legal context.

Consider a scenario where the couple whose embryos have been frozen disagree as to whether they should be implanted or destroyed. Whose will prevail? What if they have split up and one party wants to utilise the embryos to start a family with a new partner and the former partner objects to this?

Will the right to form a family prevail over the right not to be coerced to be a genetic parent to a child whose birth you don’t want?

What if circumstances change and a once healthy and financially sound family unit is visited by disease or economic hardship? Will the pre-given consent to utilising the embryos be given weight over the latter objections by either party? What if one parent refuses to continue financing the storage of frozen embryos? Won’t that be placing a huge financial burden on the other parent who may be clinging on to the hope of those embryos eventually being used as the only way of starting a family?

Is it permissible to utilise an embryo as a “saviour sibling” or as a donor of organs for a living being? Isn’t this the creation of life solely for the purpose of another’s needs? What about the consent of the frozen embryo brought into being for the culling of his organs?

If an embryo is considered to be a “thing” and not a self-contained, autonomous human life, then it can be transferred and inherited like all other things. This leads to the automatic conclusion that siblings can inherit the embryos frozen by their parents.

Who of the siblings can then choose to utilise the embryo? What if one sibling’s very real wish to have a family utilising that embryo is opposed by another sibling who opposes the utilisation on the grounds that it will detract from his inheritance rights? And after all, if an embryo is to be considered as a “thing”, it would necessarily follow that it could be bought and sold and auctioned to the highest bidder.

These are not remote, way out there possibilities. The courts have been grappling with the thorny legal dilemmas posed by embryo freezing and disposal where this is allowed.

We may assume that it is simply a case of updating the law so that it can catch up with science, or ensuring that contractual consent as to the fate of the embryos is made mandatory.

A review of the law suits on the subject even where such legislation is in place shows that it isn’t so. As we strive to address the problem of infertility, we indirectly give rise to other situations of heartbreak and suffering. It is a situation that arises from disregarding a profound truth about the nature of the embryo as a human life and not a thing.

An apt summing up was given by the British MP Bill Cash when the matter was discussed in the House of Parliament. He said: “In many ways, our age is one of technology giants and ethical infants – we are like children playing with land mines, because we have no idea of the dangers posed by the technology that we are handling.”

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.