This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/mom-dad-donor-britain-debates-rules-for-three-parent-babies/2015/02/03/f23a3262-ab2f-11e4-8876-460b1144cbc1_story.html?wprss=rss_world

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Mom, dad, donor: Britain debates rules for ‘three-parent’ babies Mom, dad, donor: Britain moves step closer on rules to allow ‘three-parent’ babies
(about 3 hours later)
LONDON — British lawmakers stepped into the complex crossroads of science and fertility Tuesday with debate on becoming the first country to allow so-called “three-parent” babies using genetic material from a mother, father and a female donor. LONDON — British lawmakers moved into the complex crossroads of science and fertility on Tuesday, backing a proposal to become the first country to allow so-called “three-parent” babies using genetic material from a mother, father and a female donor.
The vote, expected later in the day, is over whether to approve in-vitro procedures to avoid passing along inherited and incurable diseases from mitochondrial DNA, which is carried from mother to child. The House of Commons overwhelming supported in-vitro procedures to avoid passing along inherited and incurable diseases from mitochondrial DNA, which is carried from mother to child.
Supporters say it would offer hope to families who would otherwise risk passing along diseases such as muscular dystrophy to their offspring. But a wide range of critics question the ethics of the proposals, saying it would be another step toward creating “designer babies.”Supporters say it would offer hope to families who would otherwise risk passing along diseases such as muscular dystrophy to their offspring. But a wide range of critics question the ethics of the proposals, saying it would be another step toward creating “designer babies.”
The issue now moves to the House of Lords, which is expected to vote next month. Commentators say the first “three-parent” baby could be born next year if the changes move ahead.
Lisa Jardine, the former chair of Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, Britain’s fertility regulator, dismissed safety concerns, telling BBC Radio 4 that “all of those issues have been investigated.”Lisa Jardine, the former chair of Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, Britain’s fertility regulator, dismissed safety concerns, telling BBC Radio 4 that “all of those issues have been investigated.”
“The scientific committees have said there is no evidence this procedure is unsafe but like all good scientists, they say it will require careful progress," she said.“The scientific committees have said there is no evidence this procedure is unsafe but like all good scientists, they say it will require careful progress," she said.
Members of Parliament will be allowed to cast a “free” vote on the issue, meaning lawmakers aren’t obliged to follow a party line.
If they vote “yes” to amending the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, the decision will be passed to the House of Lords and voted on next month. Commentators say the first “three-parent” baby could be born next year.
Religious leaders have voiced concerns, warning the government it shouldn’t rush into a decision and that more research needs to be done.Religious leaders have voiced concerns, warning the government it shouldn’t rush into a decision and that more research needs to be done.
“Without a clearer picture of the role mitochondria play in the transfer of hereditary characteristics, the church does not feel it would be responsible to change the law at this time,” Brendan McCarthy, the Church of England’s national adviser on medical ethics recently told the Daily Telegraph.“Without a clearer picture of the role mitochondria play in the transfer of hereditary characteristics, the church does not feel it would be responsible to change the law at this time,” Brendan McCarthy, the Church of England’s national adviser on medical ethics recently told the Daily Telegraph.
If the procedure gets the green light, babies born would have all the key genetic material from their mother and father, and just a small amount of DNA from a donor female, who would remain anonymous.If the procedure gets the green light, babies born would have all the key genetic material from their mother and father, and just a small amount of DNA from a donor female, who would remain anonymous.
The aim is to help the estimated 2,473 women in the U.K. at risk of passing on possibly disease-triggering mitochondria DNA to their children.The aim is to help the estimated 2,473 women in the U.K. at risk of passing on possibly disease-triggering mitochondria DNA to their children.
Mitochondria are tiny structures found inside cells that act like tiny batteries, providing energy to the cell. They also have their own DNA. When they don’t do their job properly, the results can be devastating. Faulty mitochondria have been linked to blindness, deafness, dementia and muscular dystrophy.Mitochondria are tiny structures found inside cells that act like tiny batteries, providing energy to the cell. They also have their own DNA. When they don’t do their job properly, the results can be devastating. Faulty mitochondria have been linked to blindness, deafness, dementia and muscular dystrophy.
The mitochondria’s 37 genes are a small fraction of those in the human genome, and unlike nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA does not affect appearance characteristics like hair color. The ban on tinkering with nuclear DNA would still be in place.The mitochondria’s 37 genes are a small fraction of those in the human genome, and unlike nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA does not affect appearance characteristics like hair color. The ban on tinkering with nuclear DNA would still be in place.
Still, should the law change, babies could be born with a very small fraction of their DNA from a female donor, about 0.2 percent. Opponents to the proposed legislative change say this could be the beginning of a slippery slope.Still, should the law change, babies could be born with a very small fraction of their DNA from a female donor, about 0.2 percent. Opponents to the proposed legislative change say this could be the beginning of a slippery slope.
The Conservative Member of Parliament Jacob Rees-Mogg, who will be voting against the measure on Tuesday, told the BBC: "At the moment, there is a very clear boundary that babies cannot be genetically altered, and that once you decided that you can, even for a small number of genes, you have done something very profound and then it's merely a matter of degree as to what you do next."The Conservative Member of Parliament Jacob Rees-Mogg, who will be voting against the measure on Tuesday, told the BBC: "At the moment, there is a very clear boundary that babies cannot be genetically altered, and that once you decided that you can, even for a small number of genes, you have done something very profound and then it's merely a matter of degree as to what you do next."