Child and family scholars and practitioners offer their reflections to the The Embryo Protection (Amendment) Bill, Bill no 38 (2018)

Abstract

This document highlights the reflections and concerns of child and family scholars and practitioners regarding The Embryo Protection (Amendment) Bill, Bill no 38 (2018). These reflections are substantiated by current research in the area.

1. Prevalence of Infertility- a research gap among Maltese families. The fertility in Malta is below average when compared to other European countries. Research on the causes of infertility here in Malta needs to be considered as high priority on our research agenda.

2. Embryo freezing and their adoption. Embryo freezing and the giving up of one’s embryo to adoption are highly sensitive and complex issues that may further create distress in the couple going through the difficult journey of dealing with infertility and trying so hard to have a child. The couple’s distress may be further aggravated by the fact that even if they do agree to give up their embryos for adoption, they have no guarantee that they will in fact be adopted.

Making embryos available for adoption is a complicated matter for the children themselves. These children need to come to terms with the fact that in their parents’ complex journey to have their biological children, their parents decided to increase their probability of becoming fertile by consenting to having multiple embryos and then giving up those which are unused for adoption.

3. Gamete donation. Anonymous gamete donation is not acceptable, as children have a right to know the identity of their biological parents. Keeping the children’s biological parentage a secret may be detrimental to their wellbeing.

The existing studies regarding the quality of parenting and family functioning show higher levels of warmth and discipline when compared to other family forms reflecting the higher motivation of donor recipient parents to have children. However they were carried out with non-disclosing parents. Several studies highlight the struggle that dual parent families face when having to disclose the nature of their children’s conception.

Less positive relationships were found between mothers and adolescents in egg donation families than in donor insemination families. More research is needed to explore the mother – adolescent relationship in egg donation families.

4. Surrogacy. Surrogacy is fraught with ethical concerns and merits serious legal considerations. One third of the mothers who were interviewed reported feeling upset after they gave the baby to the intended parent with one feeling severely upset. For intended parents the experience can be quite taxing. They may feel anxious, fearing that the surrogate mother may not relinquish the baby once the pregnancy is over. The relationship between the surrogate mother and the intended parents may play a crucial role in the wellbeing of the child.

The most important effects of surrogacy have to do with the child’s sense of identity. Adolescents born through surrogacy did not differ in terms of their adjustment when compared to other family forms. The authors point out that one needs to keep in mind that the longitudinal study is the only study that is available worldwide. It has a small sample and although the research design is strong, it may have succeeded in recruiting well functioning families more easily. Replication possibly in other cultural contexts is recommended.

5. Conclusions. Throughout the various pieces of research, it transpires that every person involved in assisted reproductive technology that is included in the proposed amendments to the Human Embryo Act faces very complex and challenging life experiences.

More research is needed regarding the impact of assisted reproductive technology on the wellbeing of all the parties involved.

Finally, adoption and fostering should be encouraged and promoted. Too many of our children are still being placed in children’s homes without any hope of them going back to their own parents. Moreover the WHO and the United Nations General Assembly of 2007 have recommended that children from 0 to 5 should not be placed in an institution and a process of deinstitutionalization needs to be accelerated.