Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document


The order of the day having been read for the resumption of the debate on the question—That the Bill be now read a second time—And on the amendment
moved thereto by Mr McClelland, viz.—That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "the House:

(1) condemns the Government for introducing a bill which is:

 (a) discriminatory and socially divisive;

(b) a completely inadequate response to the complex ethical, social and economic issues involved in the development and use of assisted reproductive technologies; and

(c) totally ignores other areas involving the care and upbringing of children where similar issues and principles are raised; and

(2) calls on the Government to implement the strong and unanimous recommendations of the Australian Health Ethics Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council to establish a national framework to regulate the provision and development of assisted reproductive technology (ART) services which should include:

 (a) mechanisms to evaluate, assess and prioritise the provision of ART services, including providing necessary criteria to protect, as a primary consideration, the interests of children who may be born from the use of ART as well as the interests of donors and those persons seeking to use ART;

(b) measures to ensure that any child born as a result of the use of ART is able to identify and locate his or her biological parents;

(c) adequate facilities and resources for medical practitioners to obtain expert advice and guidance on the complex ethical, social and economic issues involved in the use of ART; and

(d) procedures to monitor and review the use of ART to ensure that the benefits of ART to participants are balanced with the interests of society as a whole"—

Debate resumed.

Mrs Irwin addressing the House—