Proposals for life

France is progressing towards the approval of the new bioethics law, with amendments to the 2004 legislation. On the eve of the parliamentary debate on the document, submitted to the national assembly on October 20 2010, due to be examined by a special commission and approved within the first three months of 2011, French bishops presented to the French national Assembly MPs a statement with remarks and proposals aimed at “protecting everyone’s dignity, notably the more vulnerable.” The statement refers also to the États généraux de la bioéthique, launched by the French Presidency in the first semester of 2009 to enable all citizens to be informed and express their opinion, whose final report was presented on July 1st 2009. Also the Bishops’ Conference, which has been following bioethical issues for years, took part in the debate, opened a blog on the subject and set up a team of experts chaired by Msgr. Pierre d’Ornellas, archbishop of Rennes. Information regarding serious genetic anomalies, the “cross over” donation of organs (paired-exchanged donation), prenatal diagnosis, medical assistance to procreation with third party donors and the research on human embryos are the key themes of the bill examined in the bishops’ message that can be downloaded by logging on www.eglise.catholique.frGenetic disorders, paired-exchanged donation, prenatal diagnosis. If a genetic disorder is diagnosed, the provision lays down a set of options to supply all the needed information to the family members of the patient, whereby the physician helps draw up a document providing the necessary information on the genetic disorder. The bishops introduce the possibility for the patient to consult “a psychologist or a close friend whilst facing the news of the diagnosis”. The bill also accounts for the possibility of cross over organ transplantation (exchanged between two suitable donor-receiver couples, blood-related but biologically incompatible, ed.’s note) in compliance with the principle of anonymity, but it fails to address the question of post mortem donation, currently carried out on the basis of alleged consensus. “Why not opt for the possibility of pre-death decision, which is more respectful of freedom?”, is the Church’s question. As relates to prenatal diagnosis, it is considered “legitimate” to provide information before and after each examination and receive the “free and informed consent” of the pregnant woman. But in case there is an ascertained risk the information provided to the woman should not be “discriminating towards the disabled”. Medically assisted procreation. The provision addresses the question of removing gamete donors’ anonymity. The child thus conceived has the possibility of accessing non-identifiable data on the donor (whose consensus remains mandatory), and in this way “the document amends to an objective injustice done to a child who is deliberately distanced from the data on his/her filiation”. However, since the matter “raises numerous problems”, in the interest of the minor the Bishops’ Conference invites to “exclude the possibility of MAP with external donors”, or at least “to provide interested couples with objective and exhaustive information on the difficulties they could encounter and the possibility of adopting, prior to the gamete donation”. The preservation of human embryos, according to the bishops’ “should not become an MAP technique”, “which raises questions on the legalization of this ‘primary violation’, i.e. the freezing of human beings”. Ovocites vitrification freezing methods demand “a serious evaluation and a rigid modus operandi”. It could be taken into account only if it enabled to put an end to the embryo freezing. The bill also envisages that the couples who signed “a civil solidarity pact” be exempted from two years’ compulsory cohabitation prior to MAP. However, the prelates reckon that this measure is “not justifiable” and that “it prejudices the child’s interest who is in need of stability”.Research on human embryos. The bishops equally reiterate the importance of maintaining the ban on human embryo research. “Legislation must protect them from reification and manipulation”. However, the new derogation possibilities, stripping the principle of its value, “severely modify the spirit of the law”. In order to carried out “high-level parliamentary debate” the prelates yearn for “objective information” that will take into account “scientific progress on adult stem cells” and the results that could be provided by animal embryo research. “A coherent reflection on the fundamental values involved in particular choices – concluded the Bishops’ Conference – would give full meaning to the ethical value which the ban on human embryo research promotes for the future of society, which has the duty to protect vulnerable brackets for its very own good”.