by NexDev | February 9, 2016 | Bioethics, Prenatal diagnosis
On February 5, 2016, the United Nations (UN) requested that countries concerned by the Zika virus epidemic authorize women to have access to contraception and abortion. Three days earlier, on February 2, the World Health Organization (WHO) decreed a state of “public health urgency on an international scale”.
In terms of spreading, this arbovirus is a mosquito-borne virus transmitted by mosquitoes of the Aedes genus, leading to the Zika fever in human beings. The infection is symptomatic in only 18% of cases and its’ clinical diagnostic is difficult. The Zika virus is suspected to be linked to the Guillain-Barré neurological syndrome. For the moment the consequences to man are still largely unknown by specialists. The virus has been spreading since May – June 2015 in both Central and Latin America. In Brazil, more than 1.5 million people have been affected.
It is against this backdrop that in January 2016; a study was published demonstrating an unusual number of children born with microcephaly in South America since October 2015: out of 4,180 suspected cases, 270 have been confirmed. Health authorities suspect the source to be the Zika virus. For the moment, the causal relationship between Zika virus infection and neonatal malformations has not been formally established, but more advanced studies are currently underway.
Professor Yves Ville, head of the maternity unit at Necker Hospital in Paris, explains that “for other viruses, such as the cytomegalovirus, the placenta acts as a barrier. Not all infections in pregnant women are transmitted to the fetus.”
Jean-Yves Nau, doctor and journalist states: “We seem to be entering into a medical and scientific haziness here. Dr Isabelle Catala, in a paper dedicated to Zika on the Medscape site, resumes best this disagreeable sensation of uncertainty which prevails today. We could even say ‘uncertainty multiplied by 2’. Firstly concerning the causal relationship (still mentioned, never demonstrated) between the infection of the pregnant woman and fetal microcephaly. Secondly the measures to take (according to health authorities) faced with this hypothetical risk”.
In this context, the pressure to propose abortion to pregnant women is clearly a pretext: Silvia Camurça, SOS Corp president admitted that this epidemic offers a rare opportunity to push abortion forward in Brazil… In Brazil, abortion has been allowed since 1940 in cases of rape or risk for the mother, and more recently since 2012 for cases of anencephaly.
Women On Waves, an ONG in the Netherlands proposes mailing packages of abortion pills to countries affected by the epidemic or where abortion is limited. Invoking bad sanitary conditions for clandestine abortions, this ONG however recommends using these abortion pills up until 12 weeks of pregnancy without any medical care; whereas in France these pills are administered in a hospital environment and only up until 7 weeks of pregnancy.
It is important to recall that screening can only be performed during the first week of viral infection, where the majority of cases are asymptomatic. Additionally, one generally needs to wait for sonogram results to know if the fetus is affected by microcephaly, which in principle is not diagnosed before 32 weeks; meaning practically at birth.
Currently there is neither treatment, nor vaccine available, and the authorities have delayed responding to the contamination: for the moment prevention consists in distributing anti-mosquito products. On February 6, there were massive demonstrations in Honduras and Brazil, the countries most affected by the epidemic. Carissa Etienne, the director of the Pan-American Health Organization, following an emergency meeting with the Health Ministers from 14 Latin American countries, explained that “the response to this problem will focus on fighting against the mosquito-borne virus transmitter.”
by NexDev | February 8, 2016 | Uncategorized
The Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development published the 2015 statistics for international adoptions in France on January 26, 2016. According to the latest tally by the International Adoption Mission, only 815 foreign children were adopted by the French in 2015.
Between 2010 and 2015, the number of international adoptions in France fell by 4 times and is now on a par with national adoptions, with approximately 800 children confided to the Social Services for children every year. This number is the lowest since the beginning of the 80’s. It is the fifth consecutive year the adoption statistics are lower in France. Between 2004 and 2015, the number of adoptions fell almost 80%.
According to distribution by geographical zone in 2015, the number of adoptions in Africa topped the list (283 children) followed by Asia (235), America (159), Europe (134) and Oceania (4). Regarding the country of origin, Vietnam became the leading country of origin for children adopted in France with 108 adoptions, followed by Colombia with 75 adoptions and the Ivory Coast with 62 adoptions. Fifty-four % of international adoptions were for boys and 46% for girls.
Sixty-five % of the 2015 adoptions concerned children « with special needs » (compared to 53% in 2012). This designation refers to their age (over 5 years old), to simultaneous adoptions for at least two members of the same family and/or one or several pathologies. One international adoption out of two was accompanied by an official adoption agency, 25% by private individuals, and 25% used the French adoption agency. Less than ten homosexual couples had recourse to foreign adoptions. These children were all natives of South Africa and Brazil; the only two countries open to adoption by couples of the same sex.
At the end of 2013, more than 18,000 licenses in France were in the process of being validated: thus many couples may never adopt. In a report entitled “International Adoption around the globe : reasons for its’ decline” the national institute for demographic studies observes that the strong decline in the number of international adoptions throughout the world has several explanations, but all of these explanations have one point in common: it is not the number of « requests » by the candidates for adoption that has shown a decline, but the « offer » of adoptable minors. This lack is firstly explained by structural, demographic or economic reasons: on one hand, lower mortality and higher standards of living in the traditional countries of origin for international adoptions reduce the number of orphans; on the other hand, contraception distribution and abortions (…). Finally, the higher standard of living allows the public policymakers to develop social and family policies to help minor-aged orphans or those who are abandoned. Thus the total number of minors confided for international adoption is reduced.
Several decisions of a political and legal nature contributed to increasing the shortage of international adoptable minors since the middle of the 2000’s. For example, since 2006, China has demanded that the child confided for international adoption be adopted by a heterosexual married couple. In Russia, in opposition to China where the Hague convention is not applicable, the number of minors confided for international adoption has seriously declined since 2005 following several scandals, where certain events have affected national emotions (particularly that of little Artiom Saveliev, adopted by an American woman, who then rejected him and sent him back to Russia en 2011). Even other countries (Rumania, Bulgaria, Guatemala, Vietnam…) have implemented an international moratorium on international adoptions, in order to have time to align their practices to be in conformity with the Hague Convention and to eradicate merchandising children.
In its 2015 report, INED (French National Institute of Demographic Research) concluded that « the decline in adoptions is not without consequence in a country such as France: we can anticipate an increase in requests for medically assisted reproduction and gestational surrogacy”. This slippery technique could be prejudicial. It’s noteworthy to recall that “the right to a child” does not exist: the adoption process does not exist to give a child to a couple, but to give a family to a child who has already been subjected to serious traumatism by being deprived of his father and his mother.
by NexDev | February 5, 2016 | Bioethics, Medically Assisted Procreation
At the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Institute of Medecine (IOM) of the National Academy of Science recently assembled an expert committee to consider the ethical issues raised by “3 parent IVF” technique. The final report published on February 3, 2016 provides an analysis of ethical, social and policy issues raised by this controversial method of reproduction.
The committee concluded that it is « ethically permissible » to conduct clinical investigations, with the objective of giving birth to babies thus conceived, under certain conditions and principles.
In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) with 3 parents consists in producing a human embryo in vitro by using DNA from 3 different individuals, one man and two women, with the objective of giving birth to children without genetic disease which would have been transmitted by organelles in the mother’s eggs: the mitochondria.
This IVF is performed in two stages. First the nucleus (genetic material) is removed from the egg of the mother and transferred to an egg free of nuclear DNA in another woman. The egg of the second woman contains all the organelles, thus healthy mitochondria. At last, this modified egg is fertilized in vitro by the father’s sperm, and then the embryo is implanted in the mother’s uterus.
However, the heart of the serious ethical issues raised by this technique is that mitochondria contain DNA, representing 1% of the total genome of an individual. And also because the embryo conceived in this manner contains DNA from 3 different individuals: the nuclear DNA from the father and the mother, and the mitochondrial DNA transmitted by the donor’s eggs.
This technique raises many serious concerns; the implications for children born from such genetic modifications are unknown. For female children, this germ-line modification would be heritable and thus appear in succeeding generations, therefore giving rise to risks which are impossible to predict.
The American report thus suggests limiting the trials for mitochondrial replacement to male embryos.
The British parliament did not retain this precaution, which aims to limit the impact on genetic modification on future generations; they authorized this mitochondrial “therapy” last year without any restrictions.
Following the in vitro fertilization, embryos will therefore be selected according to their sex.
For Alliance VITA « there are numerous ethical issues surrounding this technique. Is it real progress or the creation of a GMO Man? These issues involve egg donation and the status of women who donate: freedom, anonymity, contingent rights for un-born child. Of course, they also concern the unborn child himself. In addition to using human embryos for research, whereby certain will be destroyed, the DNA of “triple parental origin” constitutes a new human being produced with many physiological and even psychological unknowns.
Doesn’t this constitute practicing eugenics? This technique doesn’t aim to heal or care for the sick, but to give birth to individuals exempt of specific diseases. Therefore it is not medicine, but a form of eugenics, aiming to create custom-made human beings. Claiming that without this technique, these babies would not be born, is paramount to justifying all forms of genetic engineering on embryos”.
The FDA should soon pronounce its’ decision.
For further details:
Our expert at Alliance VITA: In Vitro Fertilization with 3 parents: defiance or delirium?
Computer graphics on 3-parent IVF
by NexDev | February 5, 2016 | Uncategorized
On January 19, the French National Statistics Office (INSEE) published its annual report on the demographics in France.
The year 2015 showed a reversal of demographic trends, with a fall in births (800,000 which represents a decrease of 19,000 births, thus a fall of 2.3%) and an increase in deaths, (600,000, corresponding to 41,000 more deaths, thus an increase of 7.3%). The natural balance, the difference between the number of births and deaths, reached 200,000, the lowest since 1976.
The INSEE note a slight decline in fertility with 1.96 children per woman compared to 2 in 2014. France thus falls under the symbolic marker of two children per woman. Until now, France was nevertheless the only European country to have stable and high fertility rates since 2006.
What might be responsible for this demographic decrease? Besides unemployment which might lead to postponing the first child in France, women less than 35 years old prefer having children later and later (30.4 years on average) and the current morose situation in Europe, there are also, “hard hits on the family policy, whether it be benefits or the family quotient, as underlined by les ‘Echos’ in its’ analysis for the first quarter of 2015.”
The number of deaths has considerably risen: in 2015, 600,000 deaths were registered in France, thus 41,000 more than in 2014 (an increase of 7.3%). This is explained by several factors, notably by the increase in the number of French people older than 65 years old (“baby boomers”) who represent 18.8% of the population. France is the 3rd European country with the most octogenarians. Other factors, in particular meteorological (summer heat wave and the cold spell in October 2015), and epidemiological (bad cases of the flu in the first quarter) contributed to increased deaths of elderly and vulnerable individuals.
The implications on life expectancy, which diminished by 0.4% for women and by 0.3% for men, are noteworthy. Women live on average until age 85, compared to 78.9 years old for men. But according to INSEE “we cannot say that the decrease marks a halt in the tendency towards increased life expectancy.” The latter has been constantly rising for a century. These last 10 years, it had risen by 2.2 years for men and 1.2 years for women. “Even if throughout a long period, life expectancy at birth rises, there have already been declines observed in the past.”
In spite of the unhealthy statistics for 2015, the INSEE does not consider the French demographic profile for the year 2015 as alarming. With 6.6 million inhabitants, France remains the second largest populated country in Europe following Germany. That represents 247,000 additional individuals compared to 2014 (an increase of 0.4%), given the migratory balance. Nevertheless, recall that France, as other European countries, remains below the generational renewal rate which lies at 2.1.
by NexDev | February 5, 2016 | Uncategorized
The French television station, France 2 invited Nicolas Sarkozy to their emission “Paroles and Acts” on Thursday February 4, 2016. The president of the Republican Party went over several contentions developed in his book “France for life”. He was also questioned on the subject of the Taubira law and his public affirmation to the activists at the Common Sense meeting held in November 2014, during which he conceded that he would repeal this law, or completely rewrite it, if he returned to power. During the emission, the ex-president of the Republic said he was “in error” to make that promise, specifying his position: “we are not going to cancel the marriage alliance: that would be cruel, unjust and impossible”. He equally added that he is opposed to Gestational surrogacy.
Tugdual Derville, Alliance VITA’s general delegate and ex-spokesman for Demonstration for One and for All: states: “Beyond the confusion that he foments with his reversals, Nicolas Sarkozy cannot continue to turn a blind eye to the scope of legal uncertainty that the Taubira law triggered, for the rights of families and couples as well as for the rights of filiation and adoption. Women have already been able to adopt the child of their partner, born by MAP (medically assisted procreation) performed abroad; and Gestational surrogacy in insidiously being established in our country, facilitated and encouraged by recent decisions at the Cassation Court, in complete alignment with the Taubira Circular. These children are deliberately deprived of their father or their mother, and become items of a business transaction. Mr. Sarkozy cannot ignore that a large majority of the French population contest this pretended “right for a child” which is being imposed on us by these practices.
Furthermore, rather than brandishing the specter of “getting unmarried” as a scarecrow, the former president should know that if a law of this type is revoked or revised, this can only be valuable in the future: it’s not a question therefore of cancelling marriage alliances and even less of “un-adopting” the children. Need we remind Mr. Sarkozy of his own analysis, before his recent turnaround? : “It’s useless to say that one is against Gestational surrogacy and MAP if we do not repeal the Taubira law”? In the end, the inconsistencies in the former president’s political statements do not only damage his personal credibility. Most French people have lost confidence in the capacity of the policymakers to act conscientiously for the common good.”
For further information:
The Family Institute and the Republic, a think-tank of 120 jurists, has just published “Marriage and the law. Protect the child”. This collective work (39 authors) rather dense (44 contributions, 480 pages) and practical, paints a realistic picture for applying the May 17, 2013 law, and demonstrates that it is completely possible to legally revise this law (but only for the future), and proposes the legislators various alternative solutions, including for “homosexual couples”.
- Marriage: irreversible jacket for Nicolas Sarkozy – Tugdual Derville’s blog
