• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

MPs say yes to three-person babies

Threegoofs

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
63,566
Reaction score
28,937
Location
The city Fox News viewers are afraid to travel to
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
MPs say yes to three-person babies

James Gallagher
By James Gallagher
Health editor, BBC News website



MPs have voted in favour of the creation of babies with DNA from two women and one man.

In a free vote in the Commons, 382 were in favour and 128 against the technique that prevents deadly genetic diseases being passed from mother to child.

During the debate, ministers said the technique was "light at the end of a dark tunnel" for families.

The UK is now set to become the first country to introduce laws to allow the creation of babies from three people.

A further vote is required in the House of Lords. It everything goes ahead then the first such baby could be born next year.

Life-saving
The technique, which was developed in Newcastle, should help women like Sharon Bernardi, from Sunderland, who lost all seven of her children to mitochondrial disease.
Click to expand...
BBC News - MPs say yes to three-person babies

Seems reasonable to me, when done in this limited fashion. Science wins again. :)
 
Threegoofs said:
In this case, they'd have to pay 0.01%(actually probably even less) according to their DNA contribution. Probably not worth it.
Click to expand...

You mean, if the other parents die, the tax payer takes the hit?
 
A dangerous precedent as it makes it legal and considered ethical to construct perfect dna. Nearly everything is inherited, so anything less than perfection would justify alteration.
 
joG said:
Does the kid have the right to know all three parents? And does the girl donor have responsibility for maintenance, if the other parents die?
Click to expand...
Legally speaking I see no reason for it to be any different to existing structures for egg donation.
 
joko104 said:
A dangerous precedent as it makes it legal and considered ethical to construct perfect dna. Nearly everything is inherited, so anything less than perfection would justify alteration.
Click to expand...

That presupposes an objective "perfection".

-AJF
 
HonestJoe said:
Legally speaking I see no reason for it to be any different to existing structures for egg donation.
Click to expand...

In the case ot egg donations it depends on the jurisdiction who must pay.
 
joG said:
In the case ot egg donations it depends on the jurisdiction who must pay.
Click to expand...
True, but the point is that this isn't introducing a whole new situation in that aspect. Existing laws and precident should apply (and in the UK at least, we're fairly sensible about that kind of thing).
 
HonestJoe said:
True, but the point is that this isn't introducing a whole new situation in that aspect. Existing laws and precident should apply (and in the UK at least, we're fairly sensible about that kind of thing).
Click to expand...

That is true, except we will need to decide who gets the kid when.
 
joG said:
That is true, except we will need to decide who gets the kid when.
Click to expand...
No more than we need to decide in relation to egg donors. The principles will (should!) already be in place in statue and case law but individual cases will still be decided on an individual basis. I do think there can be a general issue (and I must say it seems common in the USA) that because so many people (e.g. voters) find this kind of thing distasteful or inappropriate that legislators don't want to be seen establishing the clear legal basis necessary and thus you get the occasional controversial case.

I honestly think you're making too much out of this element because of the misleading "3-parent baby" headlines giving the false impression that there is some kind of stronger genetic link between the donor and the child here than there is in existing fertility procedures. In fact, some existing methods would establish a much stronger link between the 3-party than this (which can pose actual legal difficulties).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom