GESTIÓN EN SALUD PÚBLICA: UK government: Parents should tell their surrogate children about their birth

domingo, 4 de marzo de 2018

UK government: Parents should tell their surrogate children about their birth

UK government: Parents should tell their surrogate children about their birth

Bioedge

UK government: Parents should tell their surrogate children about their birth

by Xavier Symons | 4 Mar 2018 | 1 comment

The UK’s Department for Health and Social Care has released new guidelines advising that children born via surrogacy be told of their origins.

The guidelines, released last Wednesday, are intended to “ensure LGBTQ+ individuals are given equal care, and that all surrogates and intended parents are treated with due dignity and respect”. The document states:

Research suggests that openness, confidence and transparency about a child's origins from an early age (pre-school) is the best way to talk to children about their identity and origins. Your fertility counsellor should have given you the opportunity to explore how you feel about telling a child about their origins, and fertility counsellors would be happy to help you reach a decision about this at any time, as your thoughts and feelings about if, when and how to do this may change over time.

The document also tells healthcare workers that parents should be accommodated in maternity hospitals alongside a surrogate mother:

Wherever possible, it may be advantageous for surrogates and IPs [intended parents] to be accommodated away from the other mothers on the post-natal wardd to maintain privacy at a sensitive time.

Restrictions on visiting hours and overnight stays have “been found to be an issue for male, same-sex IPs”.

Jackie Doyle Price, Parliamentary Undersecretary for the Department of Health, said that the new guidelines balanced “the need for emotional support with clear legal explanations, for surrogates and intended parents alike”.

Sunday, March 4, 2018

In 2004, Californian voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 71, a ballot initiative which created the US$3 billion California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. This was the apogee of stem cell fundamentalism around the world. Stem cells, especially human embryonic stem cells, were the key to unlock the secrets of human biology. They would lead to cures to dread diseases, perhaps not tomorrow, but the day after tomorrow.

Hollywood stars enthusiastically backed the ballot initiative. Quadriplegic Christopher Reeves told voters in an advertisement, "Stem cells have already cured paralysis in animals. Stem cells are the future of medicine." Parkinson’s victim Michael J. Fox said: "Vote yes on 71, and save the life of someone you love."

Fourteen years on, the CIRM (aka California taxpayers) has received its first royalties – a cheque for US$190,345.87 – a 0.00006% return on investment. And that’s not for a cure, by the way. It’s for a drug which has only passed a Phase I clinical trial. Clearly, California voters were sold a pup. Is it time for the state to set up a stem cell truth and reconciliation commission? Read the story below.