Life Network Foundation today appealed to each and every Member of the House of Representative to reflect on the serious implications of the Proposed Amendments to the Embryo Protection Act.

Hours before a vote is taken in Parliament, the foundation said various bodies of Professionals and individuals have spoken, each in relation to their field. The consensus which they have reached is remarkable in the sense that their consensus converges on opposition to the proposed amendments. Thousands of Maltese citizens are concerned about these proposals. We have seen attempts at dehumanisation of the human embryo and children’s rights being side lined.

Scientific and medical literature, studies, and observations in other fields clearly show that:

1.            A human being is a unique organism;

2.            The life of a human being begins at conception;

3.            An embryo from the zygote stage (i.e. the immediate result of fertilization of the oocyte by the spermatozoon) is a unique organism, thus a human being at its earliest stage of life;

4.            Embryos lives are put at risk during the practice of cryopreservation by choice. In a parallel paper backed by research, the Bioethics Consultative Committee had suggested that there is no need for cryopreservation less than two years ago.

5.            Wherever embryo cryopreservation is practised worldwide, problems related to embryo super-numeracy (such as stockpiling) have not been solved therefore embryos remain in a frozen state indefinitely.

6.            There are no concrete and conclusive studies which show that surrogacy, gamete and embryo donation have no negative psychological and psychosocial impact on infants, children, biological mothers, and society in general. Given such lack of evidence, we cannot be in favour of such practices as this is equivalent to playing Russian roulette with the wellbeing of human beings; and

7.            It is not conducive to social justice to transfer the pain of infertility to the next generation by way of depriving the latter of their right to know and insofar as possible, be cared for by their biological parents.

Hon. Members voting in favour of these amendments shoulder a heavy responsibility. These include abandonment and loss of embryonic lives, and any detrimental effects on infants, children and other vulnerable members of society, resulting from practices related to the amended Act, since no justification based on lack of information, misinformation or ambiguous information would stand.

The way the consultations are being carried out leaves no room for experts to address the House. Children’s rights and best interests are being side lined to give way to an adult centred legislation. This is neither fair nor just, the foundation said.