Comparative perspectives: regulating preimplantation genetic diagnosis in Canada and the United Kingdom

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 85, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1646-1652

  Nelson, Erin L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

assisted reproduction; ethics; Law; preimplantation genetic diagnosis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANADA; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; LAW; POLITICS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTION; SPIRITUAL HEALING; TECHNOLOGY; UNITED KINGDOM;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIOETHICS; CANADA; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; GREAT BRITAIN; LEGISLATION, MEDICAL; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; PUBLIC OPINION; PUBLIC POLICY;

EID: 33744525316     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.11.068     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Robertson J.A. Children of choice. freedom and the new reproductive technologies (1994), Princeton University Press, Princeton
2. Savulescu J. Sex selection. the case for. Med J Aust 171 (1999) 373-375
3. Steptoe P.C., and Edwards R.G. Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet 2 (1978) 366
4. Handyside A.H., Pattinson J.K., Penketh R.J., Delhanty J.D., Winston R.M., and Tuddenham E.G. Biopsy of human preimplantation embryos and sexing by DNA amplification. Lancet 1 (1989) 347-349
5. The Warnock Committee, Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology, Department of Health and Social Security, command paper 9314 (1984). London UK: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
6. Jackson E. Regulating reproduction. law, technology and autonomy (2001), Hart Publishing, Portland, Oregon
7. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, Chapter c.37.
8. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. Consultation document on preimplantation genetic diagnosis, 2000. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/AboutHFEA/Consultations/PGD%20document.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
9. Human Genetics Commission and Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Outcome of the public consultation on preimplantation genetic diagnosis, 2002. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/AboutHFEA/Consultations/PGD%20outcome.pdf. accessed 04/20/06
10. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Code of practice, 2003. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/HFEAPublications/CodeofPractice/Code%20of%20Practice%20Sixth%20Edition%20-%20final.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
11. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. HFEA Policy: PGD-examples of conditions licensed. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/AboutHFEA/HFEAPolicy/Preimplantationgeneticdiagnosis/List%20of%20licensed%20PGD%20conditions%20a.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
12. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Ethics and Law Committee. Emerging issues in PGD: project initiation document (April 2005). Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/AboutHFEA/Committees/EthicsandLawCommittee/2005April/2005-04-14%20Committee%20ELC%20paper%20%2804-05%29%2001%20-%20Annex%20A.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
13. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Chair's Letter CH(05)03. Regulation of preimplantation testing (August 10, 2005). Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/HFEAGuidance/ChairsLettersArchive/2005-2006/CH0503. accessed 04/20/06.
14. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Sex selection: options for regulation, a report on the HFEA's 2002-2003 review of sex selection including a discussion of legislative and regulatory options, 2003. Available at: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2003/11/12/HFEAreport.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
15. Dahl E. The presumption in favour of liberty. a comment on the HFEA's public consultation on sex selection. Reprod Biomed Online 8 (2004) 266-267
16. Harris J. Regulated hatred. The Independent (2003) 19 27 November
17. Robertson J. Gender variety as a valid choice. a comment on the HFEA-response to Edgar Dahl's "The presumption in favour of liberty". Reprod Biomed Online 8 (2004) 270-271
18. Schulman J.D. An attempted suppression of liberty. Reprod Biomed Online 8 (2004) 374-375
19. Tizzard J. Sex selection, child welfare and risk. a critique of the HFEA's recommendation on sex selection. Health Care Analysis 12 (2004) 61-68
20. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. Human reproductive technologies and the law-fifth report of session 2004-05. London: The Stationery Office, 2005. Available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmsctech/7/7i.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
21. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. HFEA to allow tissue typing in conjunction with PGD. Press Release Archive, December 13, 2001. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/PressOffice/Archive/HFEAtoallowtissuetypinginconjunctionwithpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosis. accessed 04/20/06.
22. Highfield R. Third time lucky for Zain, his parents pray. News.telegraph.co.uk, May 17, 2003. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F05%2F17%2Fnfert17.xml. accessed 04/20/06.
23. Gavaghan C. "Pro-life" tactics on tissue typing. BioNews.org.uk, April 15, 2003. Available at: http://www.bionews.org.uk/commentary.lasso?storyid=1642). accessed 04/20/06.
24. Hashmis Fail in "saviour sibling" attempt. BioNews.co.uk, July 9, 2004. Available at: http://www.bionews.org.uk/new.lasso?storyid=2180. accessed 04/20/06.
25. Qunitavalle, R (on the application of) v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority [2003] EWCA 667 (16 May 2003), aff'd [2005] UKHL 28.
26. Committee on Reproductive Ethics. Core wins judicial review against the HFEA. Corethics.org, December 20, 2002. http://www.corethics.org/document.asp?id=cpr201202.txt&se=2&st=6. accessed 04/20/06.
27. Quintavalle, R. (on the application of) v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority [2002] EWHC 2785 (Admin) (20 December 2002).
28. Sheldon S, Wilkinson S. "Saviour siblings": Hashmi and Whitaker. An unjustifiable and misguided distinction Pro+Choice Forum.org.uk. Available at: http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/irl_rep_tech_2.asp. accessed 04/20/06.
29. Tizzard J. Why is PGD for tissue typing only not allowed? BioNews.org.uk, August 5, 2002. Available at: http://www.bionews.org.uk/commentary.lasso?storyid=1329. accessed MM/DD/YY.
30. Designer baby transplant success. BBC News, July 27, 2004. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3930927.stm. accessed 04/20/06.
31. Tizzard J. Saviour siblings: a child to save a child. Cardiff Centre for Ethics, Law and Society, 2004. Available at: http://www.ccels.cardiff.ac.uk/issue/tizzard.html. accessed 04/20/06.
32. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. HFEA agrees to extend policy on tissue typing. HFEA Press Release Archive, July 21, 2004. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/PressOffice/Archive/1090427358. accessed 04/20/06.
33. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. Inquiry into human reproductive technologies and the law-eighth special report of session 2004-05. London: The Stationery Office. Available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmsctech/491/491.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
34. United Kingdom, Department of Health. Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act: a public consultation. London, United Kingdom: Department of Health, 2005. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/11/78/72/04117872.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
35. Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies Canada. Proceed with care. final report of the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (1993), Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa
36. Caulfield T. Bill C-13: The Assisted Human Reproduction Act: examining the arguments against a regulatory approach. Health L Rev 11 1 (2002) 20-25
37. Caulfield T. Clones, controversy and criminal law. a comment on the proposal for legislation governing assisted human reproduction. Alta L Rev 39 (2001) 335-345
38. Harvison Young A., and Wasunna A. Wrestling with the limits of law. regulating new reproductive technologies. Health L J 6 (1998) 239-277
39. Baylis F. Human cloning. three mistakes and an alternative. J Med Philos 27 (2002) 319-337
40. Assisted Human Reproduction Act, S.C. 2004, c.2.
41. Health Canada. Assisted Human Reproduction Act-a chronology. Health Canada Online, May 2004. Available at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/reprod/hc-sc/general/chronolog_e. accessed 04/20/06.
42. Ontario Law Reform Commission. Report on human artificial reproduction and related matters (1985), Ontario Law Reform Commission, Toronto
43. Law Reform Commission of Canad. Medically assisted procreation (Working Paper 65) (1992), Minister of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa
44. Mykitiuk R., and Wallrap A. eds. In: Downie J., Caulfield T., and Flood C. (Eds). Regulating reproductive technologies in Canada. Canadian health law and policy. 2d ed. (2002), Butterworths, Markham, Ontario
45. Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27.
46. Processing and Distribution of Semen for Assisted Conception Regulations, SOR/96-254, as am.
47. R.S.Q., c.-L.-0.2, s.1 (m.1) (not in force).
48. Human Tissue Gift Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. H-15.
49. Human Tissue Act, R.S.N.W.T. 1988, c. H-6.
50. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Policy statement. ethical issues in assisted reproduction. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 21 (1999) 1
51. Martin R.H., Nisker J.A., Daya S., Miron P., and Parish B. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Policy statement: ethical issues in assisted reproduction. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 21 (1999) 369-375
52. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Tri-Council Policy Statement. Ethical conduct for research involving humans (1998), Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa August
53. Jackson E. Public opinion and the regulation of conception. eds. In: Morgan W.J., and Livingstone S. (Eds). Law and opinion in twentieth-century Britain and Ireland. (2003), Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, United Kingdom
54. Cook R.J., and Dickens B.M. Some ethical and legal issues in assisted reproductive technology. ethical and legal issues in reproductive health. Int J Gynecol Obst 66 (1999) 55-61
55. House of Commons Canada, Standing Committee on Health. Assisted human reproduction: building families. Ottawa, Canada: Standing Committee on Health, December 2001. Available at: http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/37/1/HEAL/Studies/Reports/healrp01/03-cov-e.htm. accessed 04/20/06.
56. House of Commons Canada, Standing Committee on Health. Evidence. Ottawa, Canada: Standing Committee on Health, May 29, 2001. Available at: http://www.parl.gc.ca/committee/CommitteePublication.aspx?SourceId=55087. accessed 04/20/06.
57. Wolf D. An opinion on regulating the assisted reproductive technologies. J Assist Reprod Genet 20 (2003) 290-292
58. Caulfield T., Knowles L., and Meslin E.M. Law and policy in the era of reproductive genetics. J Med Ethics 30 (2004) 414-417
59. Flinter F.A. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. BMJ 322 (2001) 1008-1009
60. Genetics and Public Policy Center. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a discussion of challenges, concerns, and preliminary policy options related to the genetic testing of human embryos, 2004. Available at: http://www.dnapolicy.org/downloads/pdfs/policy_pgd.pdf. accessed 04/20/06.
61. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. HFEA grants the first therapeutic cloning licence for research. HFEA Press Release, August 11, 2004. Available at: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/PressOffice/Archive/1092233888. accessed 04/20/06.