by NexDev | January 13, 2017 | Fertility and pregnancy, Maternity
As reported in a recent study dated January 11, 2017 by the French National Institute of Demographic Studies (“INED”), the proportion of childless women in Europe is still increasing since one out of 7 European women have not given birth. The word infertility is used to describe a woman who has not borne a child, whether intentionally or not.
Throughout Europe, there are more and more childless couples. According to researchers explaining this phenomenon: “the majority of economic and cultural changes in the 2nd half of the 20th century appear to have separated women and men from parenthood”.
The INED study tracked its statistics from after First World War (WWI), when a significant number of women became single due to war casualties. In women born from 1900 to 1910, infertility rates were therefore very high: 17 to 25 % of them were childless. Following WWII, there was a boom in marriages and birth rates, due to social pressure to have children, only an average of one out of 10 women born in the 40’s was childless.
Thereafter, fertility trends in Europe vary from one region to another.
Up until the 1960’s in Western Europe infertility rates are similar to the rates observed in the beginning of the century, for both societal and economic reasons: more individualism, increased tolerance towards non-conventional living arrangements, more effective contraception, couples living together and childbearing starting later, greater employment stability. Infertility rates then stabilized at the beginning of the 1970’s “probably due to a better compromise between work and family life”.
In Central and Eastern Europe, the pattern is rather similar although somewhat shifted in time, due to strong social pressure for childbearing. But in the 60’s infertility rates also increase. According to the researchers’ report this is due to: “A rough transition towards capitalism, job insecurity, as well as a wider access to higher education, and new career opportunities”.
Infertility increased in a more significant manner in the countries of Southern Europe: in Greece, 20% of women born at the beginning of the 70’s are childless. In Italy the situation is even more worrying: fertility rates are the lowest in the world, with 1.37 children per woman (25% of Italian women are childless, and 25% have only one child), thus representing genuine wartime demography for the eldest country in the world after Japan! The main reasons for this are high unemployment rates, as well as underdeveloped family policies. In their analyses, researchers estimate that infertility will continue to increase in these countries.
by NexDev | January 6, 2017 | Bioethics, News
“Abortion affects all of us ». This catch phrase for this year’s annual March for Life has a special resonance, since the march will take place just before the new law about numerical obstruction to abortion is passed. The French Government imposed it using a legislative emergency process without any real prior debate.
Alliance VITA encourages its supporters to take part in this March on Sunday, January 22 in Paris.
Alliance VITA is committed to helping both pregnant women and those who have experienced an abortion, via their crisis listening service. Alliance VITA opposes the government’s policy which is targeted at stifling any voices that refuse to admit that abortion is nothing but trivial. This represents an abuse of authority and a unilateral ban which does not respect women, and constitutes an unprecedented attack on the freedom of expression in this country.
Every day, Alliance VITA listens to pregnant women who are under pressure from their partner, their employer, or even because of a general state of mind that tends to blame or stigmatize any unexpected or difficult pregnancy. Trivializing abortion and imposing silence on abortion are not a correct answer to women’s’ needs. Above all, they need to be listened to, with respect, caring and help since many women are under pressure and endure sufferings.
A genuine prevention policy for abortion is still more than necessary, especially for young women, and yet public services have given up more than ever the idea of such a policy. During the past 5-year term, the government has taken consistent measures to free society from any responsibility: notably by cancelling the concept of distress, and the week’s waiting period for reflection before an abortion. But in truth, abortion affects all men and women.
This is why, in this pre-electoral period, Alliance VITA calls for a national commitment for this March and for a genuine prevention policy for abortion. This requires an unbiased and complete public information as a prerequisite. In December, Alliance VITA’s lawyer addressed a registered letter to French health Minister, Marisol Touraine, officially requesting that all biased information on abortion be deleted from the government’s “official” website (www.ivg.social-sante.gouv.fr), since such information could deceive individuals who visit their site.
Alliance VITA pleads for women to have the right of freedom of expression, and for people to have the right and liberty to help them avoid abortion, as many of them would like to.
by NexDev | January 6, 2017 | Uncategorized
The French law “Justice in the 21st century” adopted in October 2016, contains two symbolic measures concerning the family which will become effective in 2017.
Divorce by mutual consent without a judge: a legal « revolution »
As of January 1, 2017, this very controversial procedure has become effective. The Justice Minister believes the new law will allow divorces by mutual consent within a month, compared to the current 3 months (whereas high-conflict divorces take up to 2 years). According to INSEE, France’s National Institute of Statistics, there were 123,500 divorces in 2014 (1.1% less than in 2013), that is an average of 338 per day. More than 1 out of 2 divorces (54%) were pronounced by mutual consent.
According to the new procedure without a judge, divorce settlements would be prepared by each of the lawyers representing each spouse (previously only one lawyer was required for both) and would then be transferred to a notary who registers the act, enforceable after a 15-day withdrawal period. The absence of a judge is not trivial: indeed his role was to control the equity and the substance of the agreement between the spouses as well as their free consent. The judge acted as a guardian in the child’s best interest.
During the parliamentary shuttle, the Senate attempted to restrict this procedure to couples without children. The text adopted provides however that in the case of under-age children, the parents must inform the minors that they can ask to be heard by a judge, in which case the procedure with a judge will apply.
Henceforth, divorce is regarded as a contract, “as an object of invalidity and can be voided” by legal recourse, underlined the lawyer, Maître Elodie Mulon who describes it as a revolution and declares “it’s not entirely sure whether the legislator understands the full implications of this measure”.
This « revolution » in family law raises concerns for the protection of children and spouses after the separation.
« When there is domestic abuse, women who are victims want the separation to be pronounced as quickly as possible and they are often ready to relinquish their rights” according to feminist associations. “The judge acts as a safety belt, a protector, and he is impartial “adds the French Union for Family Associations. The associations also fear that the costs of divorce will increase, with lawyers escalating their fees.
‘PACS’ Civil solidarity pacts to be signed in town halls; a powerful symbol passed unnoticed
The second measure concerns registering in town halls for the ‘PACS’ (civil solidarity pact between partners who cannot legally marry). This will become effective in November 2017. It is remarkable that this emblematic change was passed practically without any opposition. Whereas in 1999 when the ‘PACS’ law was voted, the signing of this contract at the Court House constituted a prominent key issue so as not to resemble a marriage. At the time it was promised that mayors would never register ‘PACS’ in town halls…
by NexDev | January 6, 2017 | Bioethics, News
As of January 1, 2017, in accordance with the French Health Law of January 26, 2016 all deceased individuals over age 18 are automatically be presumed to be organ donators.
The previous stipulation for doctors to ask family members of the deceased individual’s intention on whether or not to donate organs was eliminated by the Public Health Code. The reform, which presumes consent for organs to be removed, has a goal of reducing the family’s opposition rate from 32.5% to 25% in 3 years.
Nonetheless, the medical staff must take into account any individual’s refusal which can be stated by putting their name on a national refusal register, but also by simple written declaration of non consent or testimony from a family member or loved one.*
Organ donation is a solidarity movement which can save many lives every year. However, the strict regulations for donations must not be superseded by the shortage of organs.
Numerous ethical issues are raised by this new regulation. “It is legitimate to want to increase organ donations. But it should not be at the expense of mistreating or putting guilt pressure on the donor’s family” specifies Dr. Rogier who directs the French Medical Society of Organ and Tissue Donations.
When the subject was being debated, the majority of health professionals expressed their opposition to organ removal without requesting the families’ permission. Besides the argument of refusing to treat the patient as a “tank of spare parts” many especially insisted on the importance of keeping a trustful relationship with the families.
“Deciding to donate an organ is a deliberate willful act, an act of generosity. We cannot make it automatic just to solve a shortage of organs. Wouldn’t it be better to create a national register accepting to donate? asks Emmanuel Hirsch, medical ethics professor at Paris-Sud University.
____________________________
* 3 ways of refusing:
– speaking to the immediate family and friends, who can inform the doctors ;
– signing the French refusal register. « Currently one has to download a letter from our site. After January 23, one can register on line by scanning one’s ID” specifies Professer Bastien, from the Biomedical Agency.
– writing a text expressing opposition and confiding it to a family member or keeping it in one’s wallet
by NexDev | December 15, 2016 | Bioethics
Cord blood is the blood present in both the placenta and the umbilical cord, containing hematopoietic stem cells responsible for producing blood cells (red and white cells and platelets) and therefore has a keen interest from a medical standpoint. These cells could be used to treat blood disorders (leukemia, lymphoma) and could replace bone marrow transplants in some cases. In 2015, in France there were 126 cord blood transplants. Collecting and using blood from the placenta or umbilical cord is not an ethical issue, when it is performed with the mother’s consent and if the child and the mother are respected, according to the birth circumstances. This type of transplant is very useful for therapy and for research purposes.
Regulated by the French bioethics law, as for other cell or organ donations, the donation is anonymous, free and meant for collective use.
The parents filed an appeal, arguing that both their families were afflicted with cancer and they wished to protect their child with the idea that cord blood cells could possibly contribute to his future therapy if he was diagnosed with one of these cancers some day. Their purpose was to ensure that their child’s cord blood be conserved (by paying a private British company). The current law allows this only in cases where a particular patient has a genuine necessity for the cord blood. The only exception is for cases of donation to the newborn or his brothers or sisters who have a genuine therapeutic need, duly documented before blood sampling, which is not the case here.
This court decision raises ethical issues and is a disputed element on several levels.
–The blood was drawn “by anticipation”, although no one can be sure that the child will one day develop a disorder. So this provision is not medically founded.
According to Dr. Luc Douay, Hematology Professor at the Pierre and Marie Curie University in Paris, “at this stage of our research, there is no scientific proof that umbilical cords contain cells which could one day treat all kinds of pathologies, especially cancer, nor regenerate tissues.”
The French Biomedicine Agency which manages cord blood donations and the blood banks for preserving this blood, indicates on its web site that “preserving the cord blood of one’s child in a bank in order to treat him with his own cells in the event of his becoming sick in the future, is currently unfounded scientifically according to a panel of experts.” According to the rapporteur for the 2011 bioethics law, Jean Leonetti, this is “an ethical transgression and a scientific fantasy. It is an attempt to calm the parents’ anxiety by giving them the illusion that keeping the umbilical cord will protect them from any possible disease. “
– Opening access to private blood banks for hypothetical future use for oneself weakens the principle of national solidarity for organ donation.
This is an implicit acceptation of a first and a second-class medicine. Our current system is based on sharing, volunteering, anonymity, and gratuity. In France, preserving is only allowed for treating other patients freely and anonymously. Only the French Blood Placenta Network which is composed of 28 maternity clinics and 11 banks is allowed to preserve cellular therapy preparations.
Journalist and Dr. Jean-Yves Nau declares that the Grasse court’s vice-president bypassed the law, “in full knowledge that his judgment has a disturbing effect on the French system which has been patiently built up over the years and is regulated in the bioethics laws”. This ruling highly threatens to set a legal precedent and could weaken the donation and preservation system which is barely functioning in France and which should be encouraged. Professor Ibrahim Yakoub-Agha, transplant Director at the Lille Medical Center specifies: “We’ll be seeing transactions for business, rather than for medical reasons”.
