A “false lead”

A “disrespectful” coincidence that exploits the grief of two parents for political ends and that uses the life of one child to treat that of another: that’s how the French bishops comment on the birth – the first in France – of a child with a genetic code suitable for treating his elder brother affected by a grave congenital illness (a blood disorder causing anaemia). The birth of the baby boy has coincided in France with the opening in the National Assembly of the re-examination of the bill on bioethics. The French Bishops’ Conference held a press conference on Wednesday 9 February. It was introduced by Monsignor Bernard Podvin, spokesman of the French bishops, who expressed the hope: “May the dignity of everyone, especially the weakest, be better protected according to the spirit of our legal code”. The story of “Umut-Talha”. “A false lead”: that’s how the French bishops comment on the case of the baby boy born to parents of Turkish origin at Clamart, in the suburbs of Paris, on 26 January. His genetic code will permit doctors to treat his baby brother. It’s the first birth of this kind (so-called “saviour sibling) in France. The baby, who weighed 3.65 kilos at birth, was conceived through in-vitro fertilization following a dual genetic pre-implantation diagnosis which permitted the selection of a healthy embryo. This dual diagnostic procedure made it possible to ensure both that the baby would be immune from the grave genetic disorder (beta thalassaemia) from which the family’s first two children suffer, and that he would be a donor genetically compatible with one of his siblings. This tissue compatibility (HLA) further permits a later transplant of blood from the spinal column, removed after his birth, to treat his elder brother. The child has been given the name “Umut-Talha” which means in Turkish “our hope”. A form of exploitation. Cardinal André Vingt-Trois, Archbishop of Paris and President of the French Bishops’ Conference, was the first to intervene on the case: he said he was “totally opposed” to the conception of children for therapeutic ends, since that would be tantamount to the “exploitation” of a human being in favour of another. “Of course I welcome – he explained – the miracle that this birth represents” but that does not mean that we “can use someone at the exclusive service of someone else” or that “this child can be turned into a tool to try to cure another child”. “Are we to become mere tools? I am totally against that”. The day before the bishops’ press conference, on Tuesday 8 February, the examination began in the French National Assembly of the controversial bill on bioethics. In this regard, the cardinal repeated the opposition of the Catholic Church to research on human embryos and recalled that the Church has contributed to this discussion for many years. A discussion within the Church itself began in 2009; it later gave rise to a blog promoted and guided by Mgr. Pierre d’Ornellas, Archbishop of Rennes and chairman of the working group on bioethics set up by the French Bishops’ Conference. Therapies appropriate to the dignity of everyone. Other French bishops have also intervened on the case of “Umut-Talha”. A group of them signed a communiqué on the matter. “Wishing to cure one’s own brother in humanity – they write – does credit to man. There are people who dedicate their whole life to this end. Accompanying the sufferings of parents who have a gravely ill child is a duty of society. We understand their grief and their hope in medicine. But legalizing the use of the most vulnerable human being to cure another, is not worthy of man. Conceiving a child to exploit him – even if to treat another human being – is not respectful of his dignity. What will the child say when he discovers he has been used as a therapeutic remedy? Such utilitarianism is always a regression. It’s dangerous for a society not to respect the paramount interest of the child prescribed by the Convention on Children’s Rights. We encourage research so that it may find ever more appropriate therapies”. An inalienable right. “There’s something strange about this birth – commented Archbishop Pierre d’Ornellas in speaking to journalists – because it seems to have been exploited to impact on the parliamentary debate. This exploitation is unworthy. Of course, behind it all is the suffering of two parents who have a gravely ill child. However it’s unworthy to exploit someone’s suffering to champion one’s own opinion”. So the solution of the baby conceived to help cure another is, according to the French bishops, a “false lead”: the wrong road to go down. “Each child – says the archbishop of Rennes – has an inalienable right to be born for himself, to be loved for himself, and to be accepted for himself”.