UNBORN CHILDREN (PROTECTION) BILL (Hansard, 7 June 1985)

§ Miss Joan Maynard (Sheffield, Brightside)
I wish to present a petition signed by 189 people from all over the country, including Sheffield. It reads: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled. The Humble Petition of UK Residents Sheweth:— That the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill will, if enacted, severely damage the treatment of infertile women, prevent much-needed research, encroach upon patient confidentiality and give legal protection to the embryo. Wherefore your Petitioners pray That your Honourable House Do Vote against the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill at Third Reading, realising that it pre-empts a proper consideration of the Warnock Report by charging for application for a named woman to be treated for infertility by in vitro fertilisation; it discriminates against poor women and brings the State into an area of private life by severely restricting the use of fertilised embryos; it damages research into infertility, causes of handicap, contraception, gene defects and treatment of infertility by giving embryos legal protection; it accepts the view of a minority of the population and opens the way to an attack on abortion and the use of some forms of contraception. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc. To lie upon the Table.

§ Mrs. Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley)
With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I present a petition on behalf of 1,000 men and women from all over Britain who believe that if the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill becomes law the prospects for families who suffer from muscular dystrophy and many similar conditions could be adversely affected. If the Bill becomes law research work on early human embryos will be prevented altogether, which will preclude the use of important anticipated developments involving the testing of early human embryos for the prevention of handicap and malformation.
The petitioners note that research on human embryos in Britain has been held back for the past two years due to the deliberations of the Warnock committee and in anticipation of controlling legislation. At present, scientists depend on early prenatal diagnosis at two to four months of pregnancy to prevent the birth of handicapped children. The petitioners believe that before long it should be possible to select for reimplantation embryos which have been shown to be free from the abnormality under investigation, thus doing away with the need for selective abortion. Those developments could well lead to the elimination of a number of grossly handicapping 595 conditions such as muscular dystrophy, but before being introduced into clinical practice such techniques will need to be researched and tested on early human embryos. That is what the current Bill will ban.
The petitioners are convinced that the Bill represents a major step backwards in the fight against genetic disease. They accept that there is a need for legislation in this area but believe that it should be properly balanced, taking into account the needs of parents and children at risk. The petitioners pray that the far-reaching effects that this Bill could have both on medical research and on families suffering from genetic disorders should be properly considered and that this Bill should be defeated.
To lie upon the Table.

§ Mr. Willie W. Hamilton (Fife, Central)
Before I present the petition, may I put a point of order to you, Mr. Speaker. It relates directly to the petition that I am about to present. Since going through the necessary procedure, by taking the petition to the Journal Office and obtaining the signature of the Clerk there and subsequently taking it to the Lower Table Office, I have received several additional petition forms. There has been an enormous surge of opinion against the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill. It is very difficult to keep pace with the signatures that are constantly being received. I am in the difficulty that several additional forms were received after I had obtained the consent of the Journal Office and subsequently that of the Lower Table Office. They are in identical form. Will it be in order for me to add them to the original petition? If you so direct me, Mr. Speaker, I can extract them. It will not affect the force of the argument.

§ Mr. Speaker
It will be quite in order for the hon. Gentleman to include them if they are in the same form. He said that they are in the same form.

§ Mr. Hamilton
I am much obliged, Mr. Speaker. I made that point in case some of my hon. Friends find that they are in a similar predicament.
The petition is signed by approximately 1,700 people from all over Great Britain. The House might be interested to know that the signatures range from Aberdeen to Brighton and that they were received in a relatively short period of time. I received 500 signatures alone from Brighton, including the constituency of the hon. Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Bowden). They also came from Durham and Dorset, the Stirling royal infirmary, Lincoln college, Oxford, Somerville college, Oxford, St. Hilda's college, Oxford and Lady Margaret hall. A large number came from the Royal Free hospital in London, University college, London and the universities of Stirling and Edinburgh. That is a sufficient indication of both the quality and quantity of the signatories.
The petitioners assert that the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill will, if it becomes law, severely jeopardise the treatment now available to large numbers of infertile women who long to have their own children. They believe that the Bill will prevent much-needed research. They also say that the provisions of the Bill will encroach—the right hon. Member for South Down (Mr. Powell) knows this very well because we dealt with the 596 matter at length in Committee—upon the well-known and respected relationship of confidentiality between a patient and his or her doctor.
The petition also says that the Bill seeks to give legal protection to all embryos as if they were all human beings. The petition ends:
Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House will vote against the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill at Third reading—
we shall not reach that stage until 5 July, a point that is not mentioned in the petition, but that is what will happen— realising that it pre-empts a proper consideration of the Warnock report; that by charging for application for a named women to be treated for infertility by in vitro fertilisation it discriminates against poor women and brings the State into an area of private life; that by severely restricting the use of fertilised embryos it damages research into infertility, causes of handicap, contraception, gene defects and treatment of infertility; that by giving the embryo legal protection it accepts the view of a minority of the population and opens the way to an attack on abortion and the use of some forms of contraception. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. To lie upon the Table.

§ Mr. Alfred Dubs (Battersea)
I should like to make it clear that, although this is the fourth occasion on which I have presented a petition to the House in connection with the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill, I have in the past always presented petitions, whether or not I agreed with their substance, because I have thought it right, when approached by constituents and others, that I should do so. On this occasion I am happy to present a petition that is critical of the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill. It is the second such critical petition that I have presented.
The petitioners are concerned about the effects of the Bill, and particularly that the debate on the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill might, if the Bill were passed, pre-empt proper consideration of the Warnock report.
The petition says: To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled. The Humble Petition of UK Residents Sheweth:— that the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill will, if enacted, severely damage the treatment of infertile women, prevent much-needed research, encroach upon patient confidentiality and give legal protection to the embryo. Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do vote against the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill at Third Reading, realising that it pre-empts a proper consideration of the Warnock Report; by charging for application for a named woman to be treated for infertility by in vitro fertilisation it discriminates against poor women and brings the state into an area of private life; by severely restricting the use of fertilised embryos it damages research into infertility, causes of handicap, contraception, gene defects and treatment of infertility; by giving the embryo legal protection it accepts the view of a minority of the population and opens the way to an attack on abortion and the use of some forms of contraception. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc. To lie upon the Table.

§ Mr. Harry Cohen (Leyton)
I have pleasure in presenting to the House three petitions which I think are of considerable importance. The first one, which I shall read to the House, says:
To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.
The Humble Petition of UK Residents Sheweth:—
597 that the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill will, if enacted, severely damage the treatment of infertile women, prevent much-needed research, encroach upon patient confidentiality and give legal protection to the embryo.
Wherefore your petitioners pray that your Honourable House do vote against the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill at Third Reading—

§ Mr. J. Enoch Powell (South Down)
Get on and do it.

§ Mr. Cohen
The right hon. Gentleman says, "Get on and do it." There is always a future date when it can come before the House on Third Reading without an abuse of procedure, which is potentially the case today. There are still opportunities. These petitions give an opportunity to consider the issues more closely. The petition continues: do vote against the Unborn Children (Protection) Bill at Third Reading, realising that it pre-empts a proper consideration of the Warnock Report; by charging for application for a named woman to be treated for infertility by in vitro fertilisation it discriminates against poor women and brings the State into an area of private life; by severely restricting the use of fertilised embryos it damages research into infertility, causes of handicap, contraception, gene defects and treatment of infertility; by giving embryos legal protection it accepts the view of a minority of the population and opens the way to an attack on abortion and the use of some forms of contraception.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound will ever pray, etc.
To lie upon the Table.
That is signed by almost 200 citizens. When my secretary saw the petition, she felt moved to add her signature. I know that we are not supposed to make speeches, but I support the petitioners.