by NexDev | May 11, 2016 | Medically Assisted Procreation
Daljinder Kaur, a 70-year old Indian woman, has just given birth to her first child who was conceived in-vitro by IVF with egg donation from a fertility clinic.
The mother purportedly declared: « When we saw the IVF advert, we thought we should also give it a try as I badly wanted to have a baby».
This is the country’s second case of pregnancy to a mother at a very advanced age; in 2008 a 72-year old woman in the State of Uttar Pradesh gave birth to twins following IVF.
In countries where there are no limits for having recourse to ART, a “procreative tourism” is developing and a form of “right to a child”, even for postmenopausal women. Last year, a 65-year old German woman gave birth to very premature quadruplets, conceived by IVF with donor gametes in the Ukraine. Besides the health risks for the mother as well as for the baby that are associated with late age pregnancy, such practices raise questions about the lack of concern for the child’s interest, born from a donor to an elderly couple thus resulting in the substantial likelihood of becoming an orphan at an early age.
by NexDev | May 10, 2016 | Bioethics
Tugdual Derville, General Delegate for Alliance VITA, was among 9 specialists interviewed on his viewpoint on Europe.
« The formation of Europe, a magnificent idea, is suffering from economic tropism to which everything else seems to be subordinated.
By virtue of the principle of free movement of goods and people, and in the absence of universally recognized ethical rules, the European right only guarantees a sort of “reproductive tourism”, and even tourism “to die”: ranging from the sale of ovocytes in Spain to “Thalys babies” and euthanasia, each individual chooses the least constraining place from an ethical perspective according to his aspirations and lifestyle.
In this regard, Europe often shows ambivalence. It provides no protection against gestational surrogacy, when France represents a pocket of resistance faced with Anglo-Saxon utilitarianism. Similarly, when appealing to the European Court of Human Rights to defend the human being, we are frequently compelled to contest its’ decisions which, in our opinion, do not protect the most vulnerable”.
by NexDev | May 6, 2016 | Bioethics, Medically Assisted Procreation
An international research team has just announced that they have succeeded in “cultivating” human embryos for 13 days, compared to the preceding record of nine days. Notably due to a rich artificial nutritive medium resembling that of the human uterus, they were able to keep them alive, past the point when they would normally implant in the womb.
This work was published May 4, 2016 in two British reviews, Nature and Nature Cell Biology. Professor Zernicka-Goetz from the University of Cambridge stated that this new limit «actually allows us to understand the very first steps in our development at the time of implantation where the embryo, really for the first time, reorganizes itself to form the future body”.
Afterwards, the embryos in this experiment were purposely destroyed in order to respect the current legal limit of 14 days in several countries. This 14-day limit is often adopted since it marks the point when the individuality of an embryo is assured, because it can no longer split into twins. At the same time, embryos form what is called the “primitive streak”, which marks the distinction of the head from the tail of the embryo.
This piece of news has caused a number of reactions. The question to prolong the 14 day limit has been raised, and is already being debated by the scientific community. By prolonging the legal limit by two days (thus 16 days) one would be able to study the third phase of the in-vitro embryo development, called «gastrulation». This is the development period during which the 3 fundamental (or primitive) layers of the embryo are being put into place, together forming the tissues and organs of this new human being.
According to Professor Zernicka-Goetz : “This new technique gives us a unique opportunity to better understand our own development during the critical phases (in the first days of life) and what happens for example during a miscarriage”. But this professor who is responsible of the part of the study carried out in the United Kingdom says: “it’s not for us to decide now whether we should do it or not. Rules are useful, we must adhere to them, and they should be set out by the wider community”.
Three of the researchers involved in the study, Insoo Hyun at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, Amy Wilkerson at Rockefeller University in New York, and Josephine Johnston at the Hastings Center in New York, call for the 14-day ‘rule’ to be revisited, and for international discourse to amend the laws and research policies.
For Allan Pacey, Professor at the British University of Sheffield: “This could be a revolution in our understanding of the early stages of human embryo development”. Robin Lovell-Badge at the Francis Crick Institute in London questions: “Does proposing the extension of the 14-day limit open Pandora’s Box or would it be a wealth of information? (…) If the decision was not to extend, I can certainly live with it, and I suspect most scientists can”. However for Azim Surani, research director at The Gurdon Institute in Cambridge, is in favor of reviewing the rule: “In my opinion, to allow culture beyond 14 days was justified even well before these publications”.
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics has announced their wish to organize a meeting later this year to discuss the possibility of modifying the limit. Considering the initiative for extending this limit raises serious questions, the Chair of the Council, Johnathon Montgomery declared: “The Council intends to bring together participants with different points of view on embryo research in order to evaluate whether, after 25 years, there may be persuasive reasons to review this legal limit, or whether the reasons for setting this limit remain sound.”
Thus these embryos developed without any contact with maternal cells. Yet, after fertilization, in the natural process, the fertilized egg usually implants itself in the mother’s uterine wall about 6 days following fertilization. In the ART centers, embryos are implanted before the 7th day.
This raises a number of questions, in particular: is the development of the embryos studied in-vitro perfectly similar to that of embryos developed in a woman’s uterus? Ideed, the “natural” process is interrupted since these embryos have developed without being implanted in the womb and with no interactions with the maternal mucous membrane.
This is why Henry Greely, Genetics Professor at the American School of Medecine, questions the interest of prolonging the life of in-vitro embryos to obtain “details on early human development”, whereas we “do not have detailed information” on the embryo in the uterus at the very beginning of pregnancy. Dr Donovan at the University of California however states: “We could perhaps (…) study the potential causes of autism and find out how chemical products in the environment may affect the embryo’s development.”
This research study also involves the development and use of embryonic stem cells. If the in-vitro development stages are prolonged, it’s possible to imagine genetically modifying more differentiated tissues (for example by using CRISPR-Cas9) without these modifications becoming hereditary.
This breakthrough, by re-launching the debate on the legal limit for embryo experimentation, gives rise to renewed pressure to extend the manipulation of human beings conceived in-vitro outside the woman’s body.
by NexDev | May 6, 2016 | Difficult pregnancy, Maternity
A new task group: « Prematurity and vulnerable newborns” has very recently been created at the French National Assembly. It is headed by Deputy Isabelle Le Callennec. This group will interview actors who take care of vulnerable newborns and their families and work on drafting a bill of law.
The « SOS Prema » association has organized an information campaign and lobbying. In order to inform the deputies about the hard reality of prematurity, the SOS Préma association has already sent an illustrated post card with the photo of Louise, a baby born after only 5 ½ months of pregnancy. On the back of the card, the deputies could discover the story of this baby born preterm. And thanks to an “interactive citizen’s letter” the association suggests that citizens should invite the deputy of their district to participate in this study group.
The reasons for premature birth are numerous, and in France, approximately 60,000 babies are born preterm every year. According to the SOS Prema association, in 2010, there were 7.4% premature births, compared to 5.9% in 1995, representing a 22% increase in 15 years.
This significant increase has several explanations, notably the development of Assisted Reproductive Technology which contributes to multiple-birth pregnancies and thus premature births. Another reason is women’s lifestyle: exhaustion related to work, stress, smoking, poor nutrition, etc. Also contributing is scientific progress and enhanced surveillance of pregnancies: “We now analyze whether the infant is suffering for x or y reasons, or if the woman is suffering at that moment, thus we take the child out earlier because we think that he will grow up better than in the womb. The caretaking teams must be up to date with scientific progress” underlined SOS Prima’s director, when interviewed by France Info.
by NexDev | May 4, 2016 | News
The annual report from the regional euthanasia surveillance committees in the Netherlands for 2015 was published last week. This report reveals that 5,516 individuals died from euthanasia or assisted suicide, thus 4% of the 147,010 deaths registered for that year.
Since legalized in 2001, when the Netherlands was the first country to decriminalize this practice, the number of euthanasia cases has been on the rise. Whereas in 2003 there were 1800 cases of euthanasia, this number increased to 3136 in 2010 (+74%) and to 5516 in 2015, thus an increase of 76% compared to 2010 and of 206% compared to 2003!
The report mentions a «significant increase in the cases of euthanasia reported from patients with dementia or psychiatric problems” with 165 cases noted in 2015 compared to 122 cases in 2014.
Another study, published by JAMA Psychiatry, lists 66 cases of assisted suicides between 2011 and 2014, primarily for patients suffering from psychiatric illnesses. The most common diagnosis was depression (55 % of the cases).
A report studying the case of individuals considering themselves as “tired of living” was submitted to the government last February, which concluded that euthanasia should not be extended for situations of this kind.
Furthermore, while euthanasia in the Netherlands can be practiced on minors starting at age 12, the Health Minister in Holland has just ordered a study to examine the possibility of extending this law to infants from 1 to 12 years old (babies under 1 year old can already be subjected to euthanasia with the parent’s consent).
All of these « extensions» of the law, current or forthcoming, prove the serious breach arising from this country’s mentality regarding euthanasia.
