Human Cloning Legal in United Kingdom

Written by Roger Moorgate
Primary Administrator
The Reproductive Cloning Network
(RogerMoorgate@hotmail.com)

Edited by S. F. Hill

On Thursday the 15^th of November the British High Court ruled that previous regulations regarding fertilized embryos did not apply to cloned human embryos because they were not created by fertilization.  This ruling now means that both reproductive and therapeutic human cloning is technically legal in the United Kingdom. 

Certain infertile couples, unable to conceive by any other means, have requested to use reproductive cloning technology to conceive a biologically related child.  The child would be a latter born twin, genetically identical to one of the parents.  However, somatic cell nuclear transfer technology (cloning) is still in its early developmental stages, and the risks to the potential child appear to be 10 times higher than following natural sexual reproduction.  Whether this is an acceptable risk is subjective, with different potential parents in different situations inevitably having different perceptions of what is an acceptable risk to conceive a biologically related child.  Apart from the increased risk to the potential child, many groups oppose this reproductive technique on ethical or religious grounds.

As well as reproductive cloning, therapeutic cloning has also been shown to be outside of the authority of Britain’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).  Therapeutic cloning involves the creation of a cloned embryonic ball of cells, in order to obtain cloned stem cells that would be genetically identical to a patient.  Scientists are worried that the verdict will further delay the process of granting licenses for research on these cloned embryonic cells, which, they hope, could lead to treatments for conditions like Parkinson's, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, motor neurone disease and many other degenerative diseases.

The legal issue was brought to the high court by a pro-life group who wished to illustrate the loopholes in Britain’s cloning laws, in the hope that the government would then be forced to introduce harsh emergency legislation against all forms of human somatic cell nuclear transfer (cloning) technology; whether for therapeutic or reproductive purposes.

"It is very disappointing that it might create quite a considerable time between getting the research done and sorting out the law on this," said Dr Simon Fishel of the Centre for Assisted Reproduction at Park Hospital, Nottingham, UK.

The British Medical Association says it is extremely concerned by the court's judgement: "Ironically, this 'victory' for the Pro-Life Alliance means that there currently exists no legal prohibition to human cloning... It is extremely important to remember that it was the clear intention of Parliament that research using (cloned) embryos should be permitted with the strict controls set out in the HFE Act of 1990... This was because embryonic stem cell research offers huge potential to patients suffering very debilitating diseases," the association said.

Both Houses of Parliament have signaled their approval for the principle of allowing licensed medical research into cloned embryonic stem cells created by cell nuclear replacement.  This would probably be respected by any proposed new legislation.  However, widespread public opposition to reproductive human cloning will probably result in complete prohibition of this reproductive technology.  

If reproductive human cloning is banned completely, which appears likely in the near future, then many infertile couples will not be able to conceive a biologically related child, a concept that is the logical equivalent  to enforced sterilization.  Whether the government has the right to restrict reproductive freedom is highly questionable, especially if the risk of reproductive cloning can be shown to be the same as, or lower than, the risks associated with other assisted reproductive techniques.

While the majority of the populace are uneasy with the idea of human reproductive cloning, many are also equally uneasy with minority groups being discriminated against and having their reproductive choice and freedom limited.  This is exactly the situation certain infertile couples now face.  Do we as a society really want to limit the fundamental rights and liberties of a minority group that want nothing more than a genetically related family?  The enforced sterilization of minority groups in Nazi Germany in the 1940's provides a painful reminder of what the consequences of heading down the restrictive road can be.

Yes cloning is a "scary" new reproductive technique, but essentially the question remains:  Should another person, or persons, be able to dictate whether or not you can conceive a child; regardless of the origins of that child?  

Anyone who claims to support reproductive rights, informed choice and personal liberty, can only realistically give one answer. 

Globalchange (anti-human cloning site)