Mitoethics

Three-Parent Embryos:

Gearing up for the U.S. Debate

PM

D

INTRODUCTION

D

M

P

On February 24th, 2015 the House of Lords approved a law permitting the IVF production of three-parent embryos to prevent the maternal

transmission of mitochondrial disease. In October, the UK’s

Human Fertilization and Embryo Authority will license British clinics to use mitochondrial replacement

for human trials. The arrival of Britain’s first three-parent baby is

expected by 2016.

Meanwhile, across the pond, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already assessed risks and

benefits of mitochondrial replacement (MR), made recommendations regarding its use in human clinical

trials as a treatment for age-related infertility, and commissioned the Institute of Medicine to present a final consensus report on all associated ethical and

social policy issues. The Consensus Study Committee held its first meeting in January, 2015. It will convene again in March and May with the inclusion of public comment sessions, and will draft and finalize the consensus report during its last two closed door

meetings. If MR is approved by the FDA, American clinicians could submit an application and, if deemed

eligible, could inaugurate the production of three-parent embryos in human clinical trials in the not-so-

distant future.

Here, I argue two things. First, the enormous moral and social harm of

MR and its production of three-parent embryos outweighs the good of preventing a subset of mito-diseases. Second, anyone

interested in protecting human life, human dignity, human procreation,

and the human genome should subscribe to the following three-

step plan so that the voice of reason can be heard during the

upcoming U.S. debate on three-parent embryos.

ISTEP ONE:

Understand the science of MR

P

M

D

Maternal Spindle Transfer

ISTEP TWO:

Recognize the Moral Case Against MR

STEP TWO:

P

M

D

The PNT technique of MR involves the

intentional destruction of the life of a human embryo.

Both MR techniques distort the meaning of parenthood and human

procreation, deny the IVF child its basic right to life

and to be loved unconditionally, and contradict the child’s

fundamental equality with his parents.

MR endangers the human genome.

MR abuses the women who donate their

eggs.

I

STEP THREE:

Identify and deflect misrepresentations of MR

advocates.

P

D

M

MR will eliminate mito-diseases in future children.

MR will be in great demand because one in 200 babies is born with mitochondrial

diseases.

MR will save lives.

MR has been adequately studied in

animals and, therefore, is

safe.

A majority of the public

supports MR.

Except through MR techniques, the

woman with mutated mtDNA has no other

option for family building.

MR will not lead to more controversial

practices; the slippery slope argument is

exaggerated.

The genetic contribution of

the mito-donor is inconsequential.

Mito-donation is no more dangerous or controversial than organ donation.

ISTEP FOUR:

Let the voice of reason be heard!

P

M

D

Armed with: (1) an adequate knowledge of the science of MR, (2) the ability to identify

and correct misrepresentations from MR advocacy groups, and (3) a comprehensive grasp of the moral case against MR, compose a succinct, cogent statement explaining your opposition to MR and its

production of three-parent embryos and present it to the

Institute of Medicine.

The IOM Consensus Committee will hold meetings open for public comment on

March 31st (8:30 AM – 5 PM) through April 1st (8:30 AM until noon) and on May –

(8:30 AM – 5 PM) through May – (8:30 AM until noon). If you live in the DC area and wish to present your position statement orally, simply show up at the Institute of

Medicine on those dates (500 Fifth St. NW). If at a distance, submit your

comments either by email ([email protected]) or by US mail (Attn:

Michael Berrios; Institute of Medicine; 500 Fifth St. NW, Washington, DC

20001).

Three-Parent Embryos:

Gearing up for the U.S. Debate

PM

D