The National Council of Women said it is very concerned with the arbitrary way in which the Prime Minister has expressed himself, imposing his opinion on the future of the Embryo Protection Act, which not only reflects lack of scientific knowledge but also indiscriminately ignores the right to life of the unborn child. Such a position coming from the PM himself is unprecedented.

The discussions regarding the change in the IVF law keeps appearing in the newspapers with all those giving their views sincerely believing that they are right in their beliefs. Why everyone keeps insisting to call it the IVF law is confounding, since the law itself speaks about embryo protection. Shall the name of the law itself be changed to relate more to the rights of a couple to have a child, rather than the rights of the embryo itself? Is this what is actually being proposed?

The law itself would be turned upside down since the embryo’s rights would become secondary with the couple being advanced to the right in achieving what they want, irrespective of the rights of the embryo, the council said.

Questions of what will happen to the frozen embryos if the couple decide that these are no longer required, are of grave concern.The legal implications are far reaching and one just cannot remove the rightful ownership of one parent if the other is no longer interested in the embryo. How will this situation be resolved?  Are we saying that we shall now create a bank of embryos for heterosexual or gay female couples to pick and choose from? Will there be a time limit as to how long the embryos will remain frozen?

What will happen if the embryos are unwanted? Will they be discarded? This is a far cry from embryo protection legislation.

Everyone has a right to an opinion and everyone seems to have a right to one thing or another, but this does not mean that in order to obtain that right one must tread over someone else’s right, in this case the right of a voiceless being, the human embryo.

It is vital that this law remains unchanged. Otherwise it will open a can of worms. Anonymous sperm or egg donation deprives children of knowing their biological mother or father thus deliberately denying them knowing their roots and identity.

There is no need to have routine freezing of embryos. In the case of oocyte vitrification, there will never arise the need to decide about the fate or ownership of a frozen embryo or for the Embryo Protection Authority to be burdened with such a huge responsibility.

The Embryo Protection Act fulfils its role and should not be tampered with, the council said.