The Government has begun its shake-up of the UK's fertility laws, which have not kept pace with technology or public opinion.

Why has the Government ordered a review of Britain's fertility laws?

Laws governing fertility treatment are now more than 15 years old, so there are technologies, services and issues that fall outside their reach. Public opinion has also moved on since then.

One new technology is artificial gametes. Scientists are attempting to grow viable sperm and eggs from other bodily cells, such as a skin or liver cell. This will allow people who cannot produce their own cells, such as infertile people or same-sex couples, to have children without having to use donor gametes.

Companies providing sperm via the internet have emerged since the laws were passed and the issues of so-called saviour siblings and custody battles over embryos held in storage have prompted heated public debate. So the Government wants to consult on the best way forward.

Will the new laws loosen or tighten the regulations?

At this stage, we do not know. Some proposals may lead to a loosening. Currently, all fertility centres must be satisfied that the welfare of any child born will not be compromised before starting any treatment. This has been widely criticised as intrusive and nonsensical. The Government is considering making this a clinical judgment, as opposed to a legal requirement.

Other proposals may lead to a tightening. The conditions under which licences for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) are offered are currently regulated by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and are not stipulated in legislation. The Government is considering setting legal limits in legislation.

How does Britain compare to other countries in its regulation?

Britain was one of the first countries to introduce legislation regulating fertility treatment. The law here is comprehensive, yet permissive, more so than countries like Italy, which have banned PGD, gamete donation and most embryo research. The law is somewhat more restrictive than in the US, however, which has very few fertility laws at all. Sex selection and choosing physical characteristics of gamete donors are both possible in the US and not allowed here.

Can the Government be accused of wanting too much say in the lives of families that use IVF treatment?

The Government has recognised that its role in family’s reproductive freedom is open to criticism. Ministers are asking for opinions on whether their role (for example in requiring that the welfare of the child be assessed) might be diminished. But the Government does want to maintain the model of it setting the parameters with an independent authority (like the HFEA) overseeing licensing and specific activities.

Does the Government normally listen in these consultations?

The Department of Health has held several similar exercises in the past which have had a big impact. Last year there was a consultation into public health, which asked for people’s views on issues like smoking, obesity and physical activity.The responses were taken into account when drafting the White Paper on public health. A White Paper on fertility is expected, so the responses may be taken on in the same way.

Ainsley Newson is a researcher in medical ethics at Imperial College London and currently a British Association Media Fellow at The Times, explains the government’s new inquiry into fertility laws.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Swine flu vaccine for all as drug rushed through
• Artificial sperm and the race to build a baby
• BBC jets out stars to tout for prizes