Aleteia logoAleteia logo
Monday 02 August |
Saint of the Day: St. Peter Julian Eymard
home iconLifestyle
line break icon

UK Parliament Okays “Three-Parent Babies.” Is US Next?


<div id="prtlt" style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif, Geneva;font-size:12px;line-height:18px;"> <p>&nbsp;</p> </div>

John Burger - published on 02/05/15

Opponents say the UK vote crossed an important moral line that might lead society to a “point of no return.”

The same sort of technology that the UK’s House of Commons approved of this week, ushering in so-called “three-parent babies,” is under serious consideration by the US government.

A bill passed Tuesday in the lower house of Parliament would allow for the first time anywhere in the world the creation of persons comprised of DNA from three parents. Members of Parliament voted 382-128 to legalize the procedure, which advocates say is needed to prevent a devestating hereditary disease.

The bill goes before the House of Lords later this month.

The new fertility techniques aim to help women who are carriers of mitochondrial disease from passing it on to their children, according to the Associated Press. Mitochondria are the energy-producing structures outside of a cell’s nucleus, and defects in them can result in degenerative diseases including muscular dystrophy, problems with the heart and kidneys, severe muscle weakness, epilepsy and mental retardation.

But opponents say the UK vote crossed an important moral line that might lead society to a “point of no return.”

“Whilst the Church recognizes the suffering that mitochondrial diseases bring and hopes that alternative methods of treatment can be found, it remains opposed on principle to these procedures where the destruction of human embryos is part of the process,” said Bishop John Sherrington of the UK Bishops Conference Department for Christian Responsibility and Citizenship after Tuesday’s vote. “This about a human life with potential, arising from a father and a mother, being used as disposable material. The human embryo is a new human life with potential; it should be respected and protected from the moment of conception and not used as disposable material.”

For Edmund Adamus, director of the Office of Marriage and Family Life of the Archdiocese of Westminster, it’s a case of caveat emptor. Though the new technology is promoted as a great panacea, one must recall the promises made by the embryo research lobby in the past.

"In the late 1980s they told infertile couples that allowing IVF would improve their hopes, but infertility services remain poor — arguably worse than before, since very few places offer anything but IVF (which has a very poor “success” rate)," Adamus wrote in an email to Aleteia. "Look at the situation of those with degenerative diseases promised miracle cures if the 2001 amendments to allow embryonic stem cell research were permitted: result — no advances in treatment or tissue regeneration achieved by killing embryos, but many promising leads from the use of adult stem cells, derived by ethical means."

Ahead of Tuesday’s vote, the Dignitatis Humanae Institute, a Catholic organization which promotes human dignity based on the recognition that man is made in the image and likeness of God, said Parliament would have to consider both safety and ethical concerns.

“In one of the two techniques, pronuclear transfer, two embryos are created and combined to produce a healthy embryo, resulting in the destruction of the embryo created from the donor egg," the institute said in a press release. "The other technique, maternal spindle transfer, involves the manipulation of the egg cell outside of the womb, combining egg cells from two different women.”

The press release quoted Lord Alton of Liverpool, who is not only a member of the House of Lords but also the Convenor of the Dignitatis Humanae Institute’s Cross Party Working Group on Human Dignity.

“It is essential to voice support for those who suffer from mitochondrial diseases and to ensure that medical care is always sufficient,” Lord Alton said. “At the same time, it is equally important that scientific progress is in line with human dignity, which it must serve, rather than vice versa. It is not morally acceptable, and it can never be morally acceptable, to destroy one person, harvesting their DNA for the needs of another person, which one of these two methods permits. This is the fast road to any of the futuristic dystopias one can find at any cinema.”

  • 1
  • 2
Support Aleteia!

If you’re reading this article, it’s thanks to the generosity of people like you, who have made Aleteia possible.

Here are some numbers:

  • 20 million users around the world read every month
  • Aleteia is published every day in seven languages: English, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, and Slovenian
  • Each month, readers view more than 50 million pages
  • Nearly 4 million people follow Aleteia on social media
  • Each month, we publish 2,450 articles and around 40 videos
  • We have 60 full time staff and approximately 400 collaborators (writers, translators, photographers, etc.)

As you can imagine, these numbers represent a lot of work. We need you.

Support Aleteia with as little as $1. It only takes a minute. Thank you!

Daily prayer
And today we celebrate...

Top 10
Cerith Gardiner
Simone Biles leaves the Olympics with an important lesson for her...
Ignacio María Doñoro
Francisco Veneto
The military chaplain who pretended to be a criminal to rescue a ...
Cerith Gardiner
Gold-winning Filipina Olympian shares her Miraculous Medal for th...
Theresa Civantos Barber
The one thing we all should do before this summer ends
Zelda Caldwell
German women’s gymnastics teams modest dress protests sport’s ...
Violeta Tejera
Carlo Acutis’ first stained glass window in jeans and sneak...
Zelda Caldwell
World-record winning gymnast Simone Biles leans on her Catholic f...
See More
Get Aleteia delivered to your inbox. Subscribe here.