‘Yes’ to mitochondrial replacement techniques and lesbian motherhood: a reply to Françoise Baylis

Abstract

In a recent paper – Lesbian motherhood and mitochondrial replacement techniques: reproductive freedom and genetic kinship – we argued that lesbian couples who wish to have children who are genetically related to both of them should be allowed access to mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRTs). Françoise Baylis wrote a reply to our paper –‘No’ to lesbian motherhood using human nuclear genome transfer– where she challenges our arguments on the use of MRTs by lesbian couples, and on MRTs more generally. In this reply we respond to her claims and further clarify our position.

Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy: In Whose Interests?

“…36 Some have argued that the criteria for accessing MRT are grounded mainly in the reproductive autonomy of future parents; thus, "the therapeutic/non-therapeutic moral boundary does not exist" in this context. 37 However, there is a lack of concrete evidence demonstrating that MRT provides higher live birth rates than standard IVF. The application of MRT as a "treatment" for infertility; thus, remains uncertain.…”

“…According to critics, encouraging alternative uses of MRT “concerns the common strategy of arguing for the introduction of an ethically controversial technology by insisting on its potential therapeutic benefits and only later defending its potential non-therapeutic uses once it has been successfully introduced.” 36 Some have argued that the criteria for accessing MRT are grounded mainly in the reproductive autonomy of future parents; thus, “the therapeutic/non-therapeutic moral boundary does not exist” in this context. 37 However, there is a lack of concrete evidence demonstrating that MRT provides higher live birth rates than standard IVF. The application of MRT as a “treatment” for infertility; thus, remains uncertain.…”