Biological parenthood
A group of scientists from France, Italy and Spain have made a breakthrough in fertility treatment which will allow women using donated eggs to conceive a child which is genetically their own. The technique, described in the journal Human Reproduction, involves inserting the women's genetic material into an egg donated by another woman.
Around one in 10 infertile women cannot conceive due to defects in the material (cytoplasm) around the nucleus of the egg. At the moment, fertility programs can only enable an embryo to be created with the use of a donor egg and the chosen partner's sperm. The new technique will use the "shell" of the donor egg, but replace the nucleus with one from the mother-to-be.
All but 37 genes (which come from the cytoplasm) will be from the woman who will have the embryo implanted. The embryo will therefore be a combination of mostly her and the man's genetic material.
Dr Jan Tesarik from the Laboratoire d'Eylau in Paris said that the scientists' only aim was to help infertile women. However, the technological advance has raised fears in Europe about its application to human cloning. One of the Italian scientists involved, Dr Zolt Nagy, has been forced to continue his research in Brazil, where no regulations exist that could prevent him from completing his work.
Most people who try to conceive a child through technologically assisted means prefer the child to be genetically related to one or both parents. Women who undergo fertility treatment endure the inconvenience and discomfort of fertility drugs, the harvesting of eggs, and the embryo implantation procedure. Most attempts are not successful in the first instance, so the process may be repeated several times before either success is achieved, or the process abandoned. All this comes at a considerable cost, usually tens of thousands of dollars.
Technological advances that broaden the options available to women in relation to reproductive choices should be supported. Yes, some are still risky and women need to be able to make informed decisions and assess any risks involved in the various procedures. Measures to increase the options for contraception, when pregnancy is unwanted, should also be wholeheartedly supported.
But it seems extraordinary that so much effort is going into the creation of offspring in the image of their parents and that couples are willing to put themselves through great physical, emotional and financial pain to ensure that a child produced by them is genetically related to them.
There is no biological imperative to do this. Humans are different from animals. Animals respond out of instinct to their own and other's offspring. Male humans do not go around eating the newborns of women that they live with if the child is not "theirs" — most could not even tell the difference.
Women and men are conditioned to aspire to reproduce their "own flesh and blood" as a result of the atomisation of human society into smaller family units that has come about in the course of the development of class society, especially in capitalism. More importance is placed on the notion of one's own family against all others. Blood is thicker than water, it is said.
But humans in earlier cultures raised children collectively, and therefore, while women knew which children were theirs, responsibility for rearing was shared by more than just the biological parents.
The capitalist world is a hostile place. For many, their family and partners are the only people they feel they can rely on for comfort and protection. But the existence of adopted children, who in the vast majority of cases are as loved and considered to be as much a part of a family as biologically related children, dispels the myth that a genetic link is necessary for a strong bond between parents and children.
Creating a society in which the social and material standing of the parents does not determine the opportunities available to children may also result in a de-emphasising of the necessity of a biological link. When the passing on of private property to one's heirs is no longer relevant, the ideology of children as the genetic extensions of oneself may fade into insignificance.
I do not begrudge the right of a woman to bear children with her own genetic makeup, but I look forward to the day when all children will be loved and cared for, and their arrival greeted with the same wonder and joy as are those who are born to people who have paid a considerable cost to become parents.
BY MARGARET ALLUM