HFEA scraps single-embryo policy after court defeat

The UK’s fertility watchdog, the Human Fertility and Embryology Authority, has lost a significant court battle to limit the number of multiple births from IVF treatment. In a case that went to the High Court, Mohamed Taranissi, the manager of two IVF clinics, challenged the HFEA's right to impose a quota on the number of multiple births in each clinic. The high court ruled in favor of Taranissi, saying that decisions about implanting multiple embryos should be made on case-by-case medical grounds. Having a quota would impede this.

There are far greater risks involved in multiple births. The likelihood of disability and long term health conditions is significantly increased, and there is a greater chance of premature birth.

In a radical response to the decision, the HFEA has scrapped its license criterion that clinics limit the number of multiple births to 10%. The authority thought it unjust that some clinics be exempt from regulations imposed on others: "It is simply not appropriate that two of the 83 IVF clinics should not have this particular condition on their licences. Professionals are entitled to a level playing field and, by removing this licence condition, that is what we will achieve."

Despite this move, the HFEA still stands by its multiple births policy. "We will still expect clinics to bring the multiple birth rate down to 10% – in the interests of IVF mothers and their babies," said HFEA chair Lisa Jardine. 

This article is published by Xavier Symons and under a Creative Commons licence. You may republish it or translate it free of charge with attribution for non-commercial purposes following these guidelines. If you teach at a university we ask that your department make a donation. Commercial media must contact us for permission and fees. Some articles on this site are published under different terms.

comments powered by Disqus

 Search BioEdge

 Subscribe to BioEdge newsletter
rss Subscribe to BioEdge RSS feed

 Recent Posts
Concerns raised about COVID-19 and moral distress
28 Jun 2020
Should biobanks be used in criminal investigations?
21 Jun 2020
Questions raised about Sweden’s Covid-19 policy on nursing homes
20 Jun 2020
Should defunding the police be a bioethics priority?
20 Jun 2020
More protests over eugenics, this time at Michigan State
20 Jun 2020

Home | About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | rss RSS | Archive | Bookmark and Share |

BioEdge - New Media Foundation Ltd © 2004 - 2019