HEAL UoS

Archive for December, 2012|Monthly archive page

HFEA consultation on mitochondrial replacement

In 2012, Genetics, Reproduction on December 14, 2012 at 4:12 pm

The HFEA’s consultation on mitochondrial replacement was launched in September 2012, to consider the social and ethical issues arising from these techniques. The Oversight Group’s terms of reference can be found here, and the members are listed here. HEAL responded to the consultation (which closed last week). Our full response can be read here: HFEA mtDNA 2012 HEAL consultation response.

Our closing remarks cautioned that:
“Assuming either technique is to be permitted for human use it is vital that appropriate follow-up studies should be undertaken (and financial resources made available to support the research) to measure the levels of both short and long-term risks, not only to the offspring, but where relevant, to future generations, following mitochondrial replacement. Without such research there will be insufficient data for prospective patients to assess the levels of potential risk vs their desire for a child that is genetically related to them.”

We look forward to reading the outcome of the consultation in 2013. Previous blog posts on this area can be found here, here and (more tangentially) here.

Today’s HEAL meeting: David Gurnham

In 2012, Meetings on December 12, 2012 at 7:52 am

A reminder for today’s joint HEAL/Law School staff seminar with David Gurnham speaking on ‘The criminalisation of HIV and sexual offences: natural bedfellows?’, 1-2pm 2055/4 (Law), Highfield.

John Coggon on Elective Ventilation for Organ Donation: Law, Policy, and Public Ethics

In 2012, Human tissue on December 5, 2012 at 7:59 am

Our most recent HEAL event was a fascinating seminar with John Coggon speaking on Elective Ventilation for Organ Donation: Law, Policy, and Public Ethics. His paper drew on an article accepted by the Journal of Medical Ethics (forthcoming); abstract kindly provided below.

 

Abstract This paper examines questions concerning elective ventilation, contextualised within English law and policy. It presents the general debate with reference both to the Exeter Protocol on elective ventilation, and the considerable developments in legal principle since the time that that protocol was declared to be unlawful. I distinguish different aspects of what might be labelled elective ventilation policies under the following four headings: ‘basic elective ventilation’; ‘epistemically complex elective ventilation’; ‘practically complex elective ventilation’; and ‘epistemically and practically complex elective ventilation’. I give a legal analysis of each. In concluding remarks on their potential practical viability, I emphasise the importance not just of ascertaining the legal and ethical acceptability of these and other forms of elective ventilation, but also of assessing their professional and political acceptability. This importance relates both to the successful implementation of the individual practices, and to guarding against possible harmful effects in the wider efforts to increase the rates of posthumous organ donation.