A widow is battling to use sperm taken from the body of her dead husband, in a British legal first. The woman, who cannot be named, wants to use sperm taken from her husband after he died unexpectedly during a routine hospital operation last year. The mother-of-one applied for an emergency court order allowing his sperm to be taken shortly after he died and it is now being stored in a clinic. The law allows sperm only to be used with the written consent of the donor.
The first British baby genetically-selected to be free of a breast cancer gene has been born. She grew from an embryo screened to ensure it did not contain the faulty BRCA 1 gene, which passes the risk of breast cancer down generations.
A couple have spoken of their shock after an IVF clinic mix-up led to their last embryo being wrongly implanted into another patient. They were further angered when it emerged the other woman was given the morning-after pill. The couple from Bridgend won their case for damages after the mistake at Cardiff's University Hospital of Wales. Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust apologised "unreservedly" for the error and said it had improved checking procedures. The trust admitted gross failures in care and has also agreed to pay an undisclosed settlement to the couple.
A LESBIAN couple have won the right to IVF on the NHS after a legal tussle, ahead of laws that will put same-sex patients on an equal footing with heterosexuals. The couple, who remain anonymous, had to go through a legal fight to push the NHS to fund IVF because, at the moment, individual trusts decide whether they wish to pay for treatment for lesbians. The couple were initially refused IVF by their primary care trust because they were of the same sex. One of the women had polycystic ovarian syndrome, which disrupts ovulation, and is one of the most common causes of infertility. From October, clinics will no longer be able to block lesbians by referring to a child’s “need for a father”. Instead, same-sex couples will need to demonstrate only that they can offer “supportive parenting”.
It is three years since the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority reviewed its guidelines for sperm, egg and embryo donation in the appropriately acronymed SEED report. But reproductive medicine has moved on so swiftly that Professor Lisa Jardine, who took over last April as the authority’s chairman, believes that it is time to return to the issue. In an interview with The Times she called for a fresh debate on two of the most controversial aspects of donation. First on her agenda is the question of when family members should be allowed to donate to one another. She is concerned about intergenerational donation, such as in two cases in 2007. In one, a Briton aged 72 provided sperm to his daughter-in-law, while in the other a Canadian, Melanie Boivin, froze eggs for her daughter, Flavie, 7, who has Turner syndrome and will become infertile.
A couple have spoken of their utter devastation after a fertility clinic mix-up led to their last viable embryo being implanted into another woman. Debra and Paul, from Bridgend, have received damages of about £25,000 after the error in December 2007.
Fertilising eggs from the wrong sperm donor is a nightmare scenario for IVF clinics, which came to light in the case of a white woman in Leeds who found herself giving birth to black twins in 2002. But The Report's Nadene Ghouri has since found a routine neglect of safeguards to prevent such mix-ups at a major London hospital led one embryologist to turn whistle-blower.
The single greatest change to affect the UK fertility sector in nearly two decades will take place tomorrow, Thursday 1 October, as the new Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (as amended) comes into force. Changes which will come into effect with the new legislation include: * increasing the length of time people can store their embryos * a ‘cooling off’ period if one partner withdraws consent for embryo storage * extending information access rights for donor conceived people and donors * opening the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority’s (HFEA) Register for research * introducing supportive parenting into the welfare of the child provisions * banning sex selection for non medical reasons * clarifying the scope of embryo research
Mistakes and near misses in fertility treatment are recorded by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority but until now details of the most serious cases have been kept secret. Eight of these mistakes were given grade A status, meaning they were the most serious incidents could involve events such as embryo mix ups, the death of a patient or an incident which affects a number of patients, for example, when a storage unit malfunctions and all embryos are defrosted and lost. In 2007/8 two of the eight grade A incidents involved mix-ups. A spokesman refused to give details but said they could be cases where the wrong sperm was used to fertilise and embryo or the wrong embryo was defrosted for use, but neither involved the implantation of wrong embryos. Last year there were 182 incidents out fo 52,000 cycles of treatment provided in Britain, the HFEA said.
A serious blunder at one of Britain's top fertility clinics dramatically increased the risk its patients would suffer a miscarriage or give birth to a child with serious health problems, sparking fresh fears about how IVF centres are run in the wake of a series of scandals. Unscreened sperm used by staff at the London Women's Clinic (LWC) to create dozens of embryos was later found to have a chromosome abnormality that could have been passed on to any unborn child, The Independent on Sunday has learnt. The British Fertility Society's screening guidelines make it clear that the clinic should never have accepted the donor. At least one couple suffered a miscarriage as a direct result.
FERTILITY regulators have triggered a new row over designer babies by allowing doctors to destroy embryos affected by more than 100 genetic conditions, including many illnesses that are not life-threatening. The genetic “defects” that can now be routinely screened out include conditions carried by a number of leading figures, such as Pete Sampras, the tennis champion, and Sergei Rachmaninoff, the Russian concert pianist and composer. In some cases it will mean the elimination of an embryo that has been identified as carrying genetic material inherited from a stricken grandparent, but which may not necessarily develop the same illness. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), has published a list of 116 inherited conditions that fertility clinics can screen out without requiring special permission.
The article in the Sunday Times last week ‘Embryos destroyed for minor disorders’ was inaccurate and misleading and could cause confusion and distress for those families undergoing or considering IVF treatment with pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD is licensed only for serious medical conditions which severely threaten the future health and wellbeing of children. It is not a ‘routine’ procedure. In 2007, out of nearly 37,000 patients who received fertility treatment, 169 had PGD, fewer than one in 200. Embryos are tested when they are just three days old and made up of about eight cells. They are not at the developed stage of the foetus as shown in the photograph.Finally, to suggest that embryos are destroyed for ‘minor conditions’ which would require ‘unpleasant treatment’ is not only misleading, it is disrespectful both to those living with the condition, and those seeking to avoid passing on these serious conditions to their children.
Coalition government promises to abolish respected regulator in effort to cut back on quangos. In the ethically fraught field of human-embryo research, Britain's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has long been regarded as a world leader in regulating and advising scientists. But now the HFEA faces the axe, and researchers and politicians are chorusing their discontent. "I'm absolutely astonished at this," says Ruth Deech, an independent member of the House of Lords and former chair of the HFEA. "I think our standing in the world will be reduced."
The UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) is investigating websites that match up sperm donors with women who want to conceive, to see whether they may be breaking the law. The move by the HFEA follows the conviction at Southwark Crown Court in London of Ricky Gage and Nigel Woodforth, who made £250 000 (€295 000; $400 000) from their company Fertility 1st, which couriered sperm from donors to women who were trying to conceive. The pair face a possible jail term when they are sentenced in October. They fell foul of a law that makes the procurement of gametes, including human sperm, illegal without a licence from the HFEA.
Ask a couple struggling to conceive what they would want most in life and "a child" is the obvious answer. They want something money can't buy, even with all the money in the world. For a couple needing egg or sperm donation this reality might change. Money could buy at least the chance of a child if donors were to be paid, if that's one of the outcomes of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) donation review. Various issues are being reviewed in the HFEA public consultation, but payment of egg and sperm donors is high on the agenda.
Clinicians and egg donors have signalled their support for a rise in the amount of compensation paid to women who donate eggs to infertile women in the United Kingdom, as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority prepares to launch a public consultation on the subject.
Should the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) be rescued from the axe, or should it, as the UK government proposes, be allowed to perish, its functions absorbed by larger, more general bodies? At a panel discussion organised by the Progress Educational Trust at the Royal Society in central London, three of the four speakers favoured retaining a specialist regulator of infertility treatment and embryo research. But Alison Murdoch, professor of reproductive medicine at Newcastle University’s Institute of Human Genetics, disagreed and called for an independent review of the HFEA’s function in regulating treatment.
Standards should never come into question, but it's clear to this Government that NHS administrative costs can be streamlined. Estimates suggest that savings of over £180 million could be delivered by 2015 by reducing the number of NHS bodies, including arm's-length bodies. And that is why I set out proposals to change responsibility for regulating fertility treatment and human tissue last week. The UK-wide consultation will consider whether the responsibilities of the regulators - the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and Human Tissue Authority (HTA) - should move to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and the Health Research Authority (HRA).