Many agree that we live at a time when science is taking an ever-increasing linear and progressive direction never seen before in the history of mankind. This has given citizens of many countries the possibility of deciding on sensitive life and death issues such as IVF, surrogacy, cloning, euthanasia, assisted-suicide and abortion, to mention a few.

In Malta, IVF legislation was introduced in 2012 and, as with most European countries that provide IVF treatment, other reproductive technology practices such as surrogacy might be considered for introduction on the local scene in the near future.

Medical practices that deal with life and death challenge society that has serious bioethical principles, issues and cases which Maltese legislators (Parliament) have to deal with when passing laws. This includes matters such as how to deal with the countless legal and moral complexities for which no law in the world can claim full-proof protection.

For instance,

• Is it right not to divulge the name of the person who donated sperm for IVF purposes?
• Is it not an insult to the child born of an anonymous sperm donor not to know his biological father?
• Is it right to dispose of frozen embryos?
• Does the law consider cases where sperm and egg are imported from a foreign country in order to be used for IVF locally?
• Are women aware enough of the health risks (both physical and psychological) before they undergo IVF treatment cycles?
• What are the legal implications of having the donor sperm of a person who passed away and wanted to remain anonymous?
• What about the rights of the unborn children and frozen embryos. Do they have a legal voice to defend them?

The above are just a few challenging and not easy-to-answer questions that come to mind. The pros and cons of every practice must be considered before introducing such practices on the local scene. 

The heart-wrenching lessons from other countries in the European and American continents must surely alarm sensitive people. We see rich, gay personalities and celebrities using surrogacy to 'buy' children. It seems that there is no limit to where a line can be drawn.

There have been many cases where surrogacy is more of a business concern for the surrogate mother who rents her womb to sell babies.

It is little wonder that many in America and around the globe await with great anticipation the appointment of Judges to the American Supreme Court that is bound to defend the Constitution of America. A pro-life and sensitive Supreme Court will affect not only all American states but will have a cascading effect on Europe and the whole world.

Perhaps with a change in party, the Republicans will appoint Judges whose perspective on such delicate and sensitive matters will favour the defenceless and unborn as against the Democrats who are pro-abortionist in outlook. 

All these issues beg to be addressed. Indeed, if some consider babies as a commodity (a means to an end) to increase their happiness at the cost of the unborn and claim a right to impose their views on others, the Christian Church and other religions have a moral obligation to speak out and defend life and the unborn and ensure that such practices are checked using the finest moral, ethical and religious values. It is hoped that America will also prove to be a moral and ethical superpower in this regard and a shining example for other countries to follow.

 

Anthony Zarb-Dimech

St Julian's