"A controversial fertility treatment which creates embryos from two women and one man to prevent life-threatening disorders is ethical, a report says. Children born through "three-person IVF" would contain some genetic material from three people. The UK's Nuffield Council on Bioethics said the technique could free children from "very severe and debilitating disorders".
 
I was interested to read that the man providing the mitochondrial DNA "should be treated differently in regulation in some specific aspects including, for example, that he should not be required to be mandatorily identifiable to the adults born from his donation."
 
The aim of the technique is to replace faulty mitochondria, the body's tiny power stations. There are hundreds and sometimes thousands of them in every cell in the body. They come with their own genetic material, known as mitochondrial DNA, which sometimes can become mutated and defective.
As a result, one in 6,500 children in the UK are born with "mitochondrial disorder" which causes muscle weakness, blindness and heart failure.
 
Mitochondria are passed down only from mother to child. "Three-person IVF" takes the core genetic information from mother and father as usual, but puts it into a donor egg which contains healthy mitochondria".
 
Other groups said the procedure was unnecessary and dangerous. Dr David King, the director of Human Genetics Alert, said: "Just as Frankenstein's creation was produced by sticking together bits from many different bodies, it seems that there is no grotesquerie, no violation of the norms of nature or human culture at which scientists and their bioethical helpers will balk."
 
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority will start a consultation in September and will report its findings next year.   
 
As with all developments which require ethical debate there are diverse opinions both for and against the use of this technique. I do understand the concerns of this process and the slippery slope concerns. However, progress usually involves some uncomfortable decisions; if babies can be saved from significant abnormality, it is important to consider this further whilst ensuring that stringent safe guards are put in place to prevent the slippery slope.



Patricia Wakeford
 
Solicitor - Clinical Negligence team