Communique – Apr. 30, 2001

special alert

cloning

UNITED KINGDOM: When the House of Lords voted to approve legislation that permitted “therapeutic human cloning,” they also agreed to set up a select committee to investigate the implications of human cloning. That committee has now been formed, and they are requesting that evidence be submitted.

It is important that submissions are made from as far and wide as possible. Human cloning is a worldwide issue, what happens in the UK will affect other countries, so if you are not UK-based, please consider submitting.

THINGS TO BEAR IN MIND:

DATE: Submissions must be in by June 1.

LENGTH – Keep it short. If you have an unusual point that you want to make, make it first and focus on that. The select committee has issued questions to be answered, but do not be restricted by them and only answer if you want to. Make the points that you feel are most crucial.

GROUPS – Try and submit as part of a group or organization. If you know other groups that you think should submit, make sure you tell them to submit. Don’t assume they know and don’t assume that someone else has told them about it; offer help to write a submission. It will be really good if there are more than one submissions from different groups even within one university, for example Prolife group Durham University, Green Society Durham University, Christian Union Durham University, medical student group, school, church, feminist group, animal rights group etc. You can submit as an individual, but prioritize the group efforts first.

JUDICIAL REVIEW – There is hope!! A judicial review brought about by the ProLife Alliance on the adequacy of the statutory instrument that permits cloning, due to be heard in June, has meant that no cloning applications have been approved and cannot be approved until after the judicial review. In practice, cloning remains illegal in the UK, since no one can use cloning technology (see Pro-Life Alliance).

WEB SITES – We need to spread details of this select committee far and wide, if you have a web site, could you please consider putting a notice on it requesting that people make submissions, along with the address and closing date?

SEND SUBMISSIONS TO:Tony Rawsthorne 
Committee Office
House of Lords 
London 
SW1A 0PW 
United Kingdom

Tel 00 44 (0) 20 7219 6612 
Fax 00 44 (0)20 7219 0277 
e-mail: “>

The information you need to submit evidence is presented below, and can also be accessed at on the Parliamentweb site. If you need any further information, contact “>Student LifeNet.

STEM CELL RESEARCH

(Clerk: “>Mr. Rawsthorne 020 7219 6612)

On 7 March the House of Lords appointed a Select Committee under the chairmanship of the Bishop of Oxford: to consider and report on the issues connected with human cloning and stem cell research arising from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Research Purposes) Regulations 2001. The Committee has been asked to report by the end of the year.

The Regulations extend the purposes for which research on early embryos may be carried out from the purposes originally specified in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, such as the treatment of infertility and the development of more effective contraceptive techniques, to the following additional purposes:

• increasing knowledge about the development of embryos
• increasing knowledge about serious disease
• enabling any such knowledge to be applied in developing treatments for serious disease.

The Committee does not propose to review the underlying basis of the 1990 Act, but will examine the ethical, legal, scientific, medical and commercial issues surrounding the Regulations as they now stand. It invites written submissions on all matters relevant to them, but in particular on the following questions:

1. Do the additional purposes in the 2001 Regulations raise issues of principle different from the purposes specified in the 1990 Act?
   
2. There is a range of different views worldwide on the acceptability of research on embryonic stem cells. What considerations underlie these differences? Do changes in the law here have implications for practice overseas and vice versa?
   
3. Have increased globalisation and other international commercial developments, in relation, for example, to e-commerce and patenting, changed the context of the debate in the UK? Would issues relating to research on embryos benefit from more attention at international level?
   
4. What are the potential medical benefits of stem cell research? What is the most likely time-scale for realising them? What are the potential risks?
   
5. There are differing views on the extent to which potential treatments could be developed from non-embryonic stem cells, such as adult and umbilical cord stem cells. What are the advantages and disadvantages of working with these alternative sources of stem cells?
   
6. What are the commercial interests involved in research in this area? Does increased commercial involvement create additional ethical difficulties?
   
7. Human reproductive cloning (the transfer of an embryo created by cell nuclear replacement into a woman’s uterus) is unlawful in the UK, and the Government has announced its intention of reinforcing this ban by specific primary legislation. Is there likely to be any pressure to resist such a ban? What are the principal ethical (and scientific) arguments against human reproductive cloning?
   
8. Does the extension of embryonic stem cell research, and, in particular, the technique of cell nuclear replacement therapy (therapeutic cloning) – designed to grow tissue for therapeutic purposes – increase the likelihood of human reproductive cloning in the future?
   
9. Has the regulatory framework established by the 1990 Act operated effectively? Is it likely to remain adequate for the foreseeable future? Have any gaps appeared in the regime as a result of developments since 1990?
   
10. Do additional guidelines need to be developed to assist the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in issuing licences in accordance with the new Regulations? If so, what should the guidelines contain?

INSTRUCTIONS TO WITNESSES

Evidence should be submitted to Tony Rawsthorne, Committee Office, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW. Tel 020 7219 6612, Fax 020 7219 0277, e-mail “>. Evidence must arrive by Friday 1 June. It would be helpful if those planning to submit written evidence could let us have an early indication of their intention to do so. The Committee is aware that some witnesses will have submitted evidence to other groups that have recently examined related issues. The Committee has no objection to witnesses resubmitting such evidence, where appropriate, with a note of any changes in circumstances or in their views since it was originally prepared. This is a public call for evidence. Those receiving it are encouraged to bring it to the attention of other groups and individuals who may not have received it direct.

Short submissions are preferred. All long submissions should include a one-page summary. Evidence must be clearly printed or typed on single sides of A4 paper, unstapled. Paragraphs should be numbered. If drawings or charts are included, they must be black-and-white and of camera-ready quality. Evidence should be signed and dated, with a note of the author’s name and status, which should indicate whether the evidence is submitted on an individual or corporate basis. Additional copies are not required.

Evidence becomes the property of the Committee, and may be published by the Committee at any stage. Those submitting evidence may publicise it themselves, but in doing must indicate that it was prepared for the Committee. Those who submit written evidence, and others, may be invited to give oral evidence. Oral evidence is usually given in public at Westminster, and transcripts are published. Those invited to give oral evidence will be notified separately of the procedure to be followed and the topics likely to be discussed.

The Committee will make a report to the House of Lords with recommendations to which the Government will respond. You may follow the progress of the inquiry from the Weekly Agenda of House of Lords Select Committees, available free from Geoffrey Newsome, Committee Office, House of Lords, London SW1A OPW, telephone 020 7219 6678. Or consult the Parliamentary website.

Composition of the Committee:Earl of Carnarvon 
Baroness Cumberlege 
Lord Dahrendorf 
Lord Donoughue 
Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall 
Baroness Northover 
Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve 
Bishop of Oxford (Chairman) 
Baroness Perry of Southwark 
Baroness Platt of Writtle 
Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe========================================

NOTE: In making submissions, it is probably worth justifying why you are submitting, outlining the fact that the legalizing of cloning in the UK has ramifications for the situation in America, Canada, and all other nations. Cloning is an international issue.

(Reading: information from Student LifeNet, P.O. Box 30304, London, NW10 2ZB UK, e-mail: “> or “>, phone: 00 44 (0) 20 8830 2086)

reminder

PRO-LIFE CONFERENCE: American Life League and Population Research Institute are sponsoring the first major international pro-life conference of the new millennium. A Celebration of Life World Family Conference is scheduled June 20-24 in Bloomington, Minn. The event will include a banquet honoring Fr. Paul Marx, OSB, for his lifetime of pro-life activism. For complete schedules, speaker lists and registration information, see A Celebration of Life World Family Conference or call 888-546-2580.

cloning

UNITED KINGDOM: When the House of Lords voted to approve legislation that permitted “therapeutic human cloning,” they also agreed to set up a select committee to investigate the implications of human cloning. That committee has now been formed, and they are requesting that evidence be submitted.

It is important that submissions are made from as far and wide as possible. Human cloning is a worldwide issue, what happens in the UK will affect other countries, so if you are not UK-based, please consider submitting.

THINGS TO BEAR IN MIND:

DATE: Submissions must be in by June 1.

LENGTH – Keep it short. If you have an unusual point that you want to make, make it first and focus on that. The select committee has issued questions to be answered, but do not be restricted by them and only answer if you want to. Make the points that you feel are most crucial.

GROUPS – Try and submit as part of a group or organization. If you know other groups that you think should submit, make sure you tell them to submit. Don’t assume they know and don’t assume that someone else has told them about it; offer help to write a submission. It will be really good if there are more than one submissions from different groups even within one university, for example Prolife group Durham University, Green Society Durham University, Christian Union Durham University, medical student group, school, church, feminist group, animal rights group etc. You can submit as an individual, but prioritize the group efforts first.

JUDICIAL REVIEW – There is hope!! A judicial review brought about by the ProLife Alliance on the adequacy of the statutory instrument that permits cloning, due to be heard in June, has meant that no cloning applications have been approved and cannot be approved until after the judicial review. In practice, cloning remains illegal in the UK, since no one can use cloning technology (see Pro-Life Alliance).

WEB SITES – We need to spread details of this select committee far and wide, if you have a web site, could you please consider putting a notice on it requesting that people make submissions, along with the address and closing date?

SEND SUBMISSIONS TO:

Tony Rawsthorne 
Committee Office
House of Lords 
London 
SW1A 0PW 
United Kingdom

Tel 00 44 (0) 20 7219 6612 
Fax 00 44 (0)20 7219 0277 
e-mail: “>

The information you need to submit evidence is presented below, and can also be accessed at on the Parliamentweb site. If you need any further information, contact “>Student LifeNet.

STEM CELL RESEARCH

(Clerk: “>Mr. Rawsthorne 020 7219 6612)

On 7 March the House of Lords appointed a Select Committee under the chairmanship of the Bishop of Oxford: to consider and report on the issues connected with human cloning and stem cell research arising from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Research Purposes) Regulations 2001. The Committee has been asked to report by the end of the year.

The Regulations extend the purposes for which research on early embryos may be carried out from the purposes originally specified in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, such as the treatment of infertility and the development of more effective contraceptive techniques, to the following additional purposes:

• increasing knowledge about the development of embryos
• increasing knowledge about serious disease
• enabling any such knowledge to be applied in developing treatments for serious disease.

The Committee does not propose to review the underlying basis of the 1990 Act, but will examine the ethical, legal, scientific, medical and commercial issues surrounding the Regulations as they now stand. It invites written submissions on all matters relevant to them, but in particular on the following questions:

1. Do the additional purposes in the 2001 Regulations raise issues of principle different from the purposes specified in the 1990 Act?
   
2. There is a range of different views worldwide on the acceptability of research on embryonic stem cells. What considerations underlie these differences? Do changes in the law here have implications for practice overseas and vice versa?
   
3. Have increased globalisation and other international commercial developments, in relation, for example, to e-commerce and patenting, changed the context of the debate in the UK? Would issues relating to research on embryos benefit from more attention at international level?
   
4. What are the potential medical benefits of stem cell research? What is the most likely time-scale for realising them? What are the potential risks?
   
5. There are differing views on the extent to which potential treatments could be developed from non-embryonic stem cells, such as adult and umbilical cord stem cells. What are the advantages and disadvantages of working with these alternative sources of stem cells?
   
6. What are the commercial interests involved in research in this area? Does increased commercial involvement create additional ethical difficulties?
   
7. Human reproductive cloning (the transfer of an embryo created by cell nuclear replacement into a woman’s uterus) is unlawful in the UK, and the Government has announced its intention of reinforcing this ban by specific primary legislation. Is there likely to be any pressure to resist such a ban? What are the principal ethical (and scientific) arguments against human reproductive cloning?
   
8. Does the extension of embryonic stem cell research, and, in particular, the technique of cell nuclear replacement therapy (therapeutic cloning) – designed to grow tissue for therapeutic purposes – increase the likelihood of human reproductive cloning in the future?
   
9. Has the regulatory framework established by the 1990 Act operated effectively? Is it likely to remain adequate for the foreseeable future? Have any gaps appeared in the regime as a result of developments since 1990?
   
10. Do additional guidelines need to be developed to assist the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in issuing licences in accordance with the new Regulations? If so, what should the guidelines contain?

INSTRUCTIONS TO WITNESSES

Evidence should be submitted to Tony Rawsthorne, Committee Office, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW. Tel 020 7219 6612, Fax 020 7219 0277, e-mail “>. Evidence must arrive by Friday 1 June. It would be helpful if those planning to submit written evidence could let us have an early indication of their intention to do so. The Committee is aware that some witnesses will have submitted evidence to other groups that have recently examined related issues. The Committee has no objection to witnesses resubmitting such evidence, where appropriate, with a note of any changes in circumstances or in their views since it was originally prepared. This is a public call for evidence. Those receiving it are encouraged to bring it to the attention of other groups and individuals who may not have received it direct.

Short submissions are preferred. All long submissions should include a one-page summary. Evidence must be clearly printed or typed on single sides of A4 paper, unstapled. Paragraphs should be numbered. If drawings or charts are included, they must be black-and-white and of camera-ready quality. Evidence should be signed and dated, with a note of the author’s name and status, which should indicate whether the evidence is submitted on an individual or corporate basis. Additional copies are not required.

Evidence becomes the property of the Committee, and may be published by the Committee at any stage. Those submitting evidence may publicise it themselves, but in doing must indicate that it was prepared for the Committee. Those who submit written evidence, and others, may be invited to give oral evidence. Oral evidence is usually given in public at Westminster, and transcripts are published. Those invited to give oral evidence will be notified separately of the procedure to be followed and the topics likely to be discussed.

The Committee will make a report to the House of Lords with recommendations to which the Government will respond. You may follow the progress of the inquiry from the Weekly Agenda of House of Lords Select Committees, available free from Geoffrey Newsome, Committee Office, House of Lords, London SW1A OPW, telephone 020 7219 6678. Or consult the Parliamentary website.

Composition of the Committee:

Earl of Carnarvon 
Baroness Cumberlege 
Lord Dahrendorf 
Lord Donoughue 
Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall 
Baroness Northover 
Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve 
Bishop of Oxford (Chairman) 
Baroness Perry of Southwark 
Baroness Platt of Writtle 
Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe

========================================

NOTE: In making submissions, it is probably worth justifying why you are submitting, outlining the fact that the legalizing of cloning in the UK has ramifications for the situation in America, Canada, and all other nations. Cloning is an international issue.

(Reading: information from Student LifeNet, P.O. Box 30304, London, NW10 2ZB UK, e-mail: “> or “>, phone: 00 44 (0) 20 8830 2086)

reminder

PRO-LIFE CONFERENCE: American Life League and Population Research Institute are sponsoring the first major international pro-life conference of the new millennium. A Celebration of Life World Family Conference is scheduled June 20-24 in Bloomington, Minn. The event will include a banquet honoring Fr. Paul Marx, OSB, for his lifetime of pro-life activism. For complete schedules, speaker lists and registration information, see A Celebration of Life World Family Conference or call 888-546-2580.