Human Reproduction: ethics and law
Submitting Institution
Keele UniversityUnit of Assessment
LawSummary Impact Type
PoliticalResearch Subject Area(s)
Biological Sciences: Genetics
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Philosophy and Religious Studies: History and Philosophy of Specific Fields
Summary of the impact
Stephen Wilkinson's research on medical ethics and law (including joint
work with Sally Sheldon)
has:
(1) Influenced policy formation processes (e.g. through being submitted
in evidence to
parliamentary committees and enquires, and via bodies such as the Nuffield
Council on Bioethics).
(2) Challenged conventional wisdom, stimulating debate among
stakeholders, and enabled
improved public understanding. Mechanisms for this include participation
in popular media outlets
and in public and stakeholder engagement events.
Underpinning research
(a) Research carried out between 2003 and 2009 (jointly by Sheldon and
Wilkinson, and also
individually by Wilkinson) generated novel arguments not only for
permitting what came to be
known as the creation of `saviour siblings' but also for the extension of
this practice to cases in
which the recipient is not a sibling, cases in which the tissue in
question is a solid organ rather than
merely umbilical cord blood, and cases in which the condition is not
life-threatening.
(b) Work carried out (by Wilkinson) between 2006 and 2010 generated novel
arguments for
permitting `social' sex selection (using embryo selection techniques) in
the UK within the context of
a particular regulatory regime.
(c) Work carried out (by Wilkinson) between 2006 and 2010 enabled
improved understandings of
the concept of `eugenics' in contemporary debates about genetics and
reproductive technologies,
and of the many and varied arguments for and against `screening out'
embryos with genetic
disorders or disabilities. In addition, this work presented a set of
arguments against the specific
legal prohibition (in the HFE Act 2008) on selecting in favour of (e.g.)
`deaf embryos'.
This was scholarly `desk' research employing the methods of analytic
philosophy to answer policy
questions in bioethics and medical law.
Dates: Wilkinson's research on organs and tissue dates back to
1995. His work on human
reproduction dates back to 2000. The work with Sheldon specifically on
`saviour siblings' was
undertaken between 2003 and 2009, with the majority of this occurring in
2003-4.
Key Researchers: Wilkinson was employed by Keele University from
1994 to 2012 as Lecturer,
Senior Lecturer, and Professor. Sheldon was employed by Keele from 1994 to
2006 as Lecturer,
Senior Lecturer, Reader, and Professor.
References to the research
1) WILKINSON, S. (2003) Bodies for Sale: ethics and
exploitation in the human body trade
(London, Routledge) [264 page monograph].
5) WILKINSON, S. (2010) Choosing Tomorrow's Children: the
ethics of selective reproduction
(Oxford, Oxford University Press) [265 page monograph].
6) SHELDON, S. & WILKINSON, S. (2010) Saviour Siblings, Other
Siblings and Whole Organ
Donation in : NISKER, J., BAYLIS, F., KARPIN, I., MCLEOD, C., &
MYKITIUK, R. (eds), The
`Healthy' Embryo: Social, Biomedical, Legal and Philosophical
Perspectives (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press), pp.251-264.
All the research for the above was carried out at Keele (i.e. both
authors were at Keele) except for
SHELDON & WILKINSON (2010) which was 50% Kent and 50% Keele. The
authors are listed
alphabetically with 50% credit assigned to each.
Evidence of Quality
1) was supported by an AHRB Research Leave Award, The
ethics of selling human bodily parts,
products, and services. 2000-1. £8,086. Extracts from this work, as
well as 2), 3), and 4) are
reprinted in a leading medical law textbook: Emily Jackson, Medical
Law: text, cases, and
materials (2nd edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2010. Journal articles 2), 3), and 4) were
all subject to the journals' anonymous peer review systems, and the first,
to two waves of
independent review by the publishers. Chapter, 6), was an invited
contribution to a grant-funded
programme of work entitled `The Healthy Embryo', funded by The Canadian
Institutes of Health
Research, Institute of Human Development, Child and Youth Health. 5)
was subjected to two
waves of independent review by the publishers. It was supported by the
following grants. (1)
AHRC Research Leave Award. Ethical Arguments against Selective
Reproduction: a philosophical
analysis. 2006-7. £25,682. (2) Wellcome Trust Research Leave
Award. The role of the concept
of `eugenics' in contemporary debates about the regulation of genetic
and reproductive
technologies. 2005-6. £32,867. It has thus far been the subject of
at least nine favourable book
reviews, including the Medical Law Review.
Details of the impact
Wilkinson's research impacts fall into two main categories: (a) targeted
interventions in
policymaking processes, which seek to influence and/or inform law and
policy; (b) public and
stakeholder engagement, which seeks to stimulate and improve the quality
of debate.
Influencing and Informing Policymaking
Since the mid-2000s, Wilkinson has sought to influence and improve
policymaking by providing
information and evidence to those involved in policy formation processes
(including but not limited
to law reform). Some key examples are listed below.
(a) Sheldon and Wilkinson's work on `saviour siblings' influenced the Human
Fertilisation and
Embryology (HFE) Act 2008. Research carried out between 2003 and
2009 generated novel
arguments not only for permitting what came to be known as the creation
and selection of `saviour
siblings' but also for the extension of this practice to cases in which
the recipient is not a sibling,
cases in which the tissue in question is a solid organ rather than merely
umbilical cord blood, and
cases involving non-life-threatening conditions.
As well as enabling a challenge to `conventional wisdom', this work
influenced the wording of the
HFE legislation. One important issue debated in Parliament was whether or
not the use of `saviour
siblings' should be restricted to medical conditions which are
life-threatening or life-shortening.
Sheldon and Wilkinson submitted written evidence to the Joint Committee on
the Human Tissue
and Embryos (Draft) Bill and Lord Jenkin of Roding claimed in the House of
Lords that this was the
basis on which his committee came to its view on this matter. He stated -
"We [the Joint
Committee] came to the conclusion that it really would be unduly
restrictive to refuse permission for
a saviour sibling to be used in those circumstances. We based this on
the evidence of two
distinguished academics, Professor Sheldon and Professor Wilkinson.
If anyone wants to read it, it
is in their memorandum at pages 454 and 455 of the evidence" [source 1].
In addition, Sheldon
and Wilkinson's evidence is discussed alongside that of the Human
Fertilisation and Embryology
Authority [HFEA] in the written report of the Joint Committee on the Human
Tissue and Embryos
(Draft) Bill [source 2].
(b) Wilkinson submitted written evidence (based on his earlier research
on selective reproduction)
to the July 2013 Parliamentary Inquiry into Abortion on the Grounds of
Disability [source 3].
He is mentioned eight times in the report.
(c) Wilkinson is mentioned six times in the Nuffield Council on
Bioethics' high-profile 2011
report, Human Bodies donation for medicine and research
[source 4]. Wilkinson (2003) is
favourably cited, and the Nuffield Council testify that Wilkinson provided
thoughtful and challenging
critiques of the draft ethics chapters, leading to the Working Party
re-working and/or strengthening
the arguments made.
(d) Wilkinson's research on the ethics of organ donation and sale led to
membership of the Ethical
Advisory Sub-Group of the Organ Donation Task Force (established by
the Department of
Health). The remit of this group was to advise the main Task Force on the
ethical bases of different
consent systems and the ethical acceptability of different systems. The
work of the Sub-Group was
reported in the Organ Donation Task Force's report: The Potential
Impact of an Opt Out System for
Organ Donation in the UK (November 2008).
(e) In 2012, Wilkinson acted as the `ethics expert' at a public dialogue
event in Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
organised for the HFEA by Dialogue by Design, a consultancy that
specialises in running
public and stakeholder engagement processes. The consultation in question
was entitled Medical
Frontiers: debating mitochondrial replacement, which the HFEA ran on
behalf of the UK
government. His role included giving three short talks on the ethical
questions, and being on hand
to help members of the public understand particular issues. These events
eventually fed into the
HFEA's 2013 policy recommendations on mitochondrial replacement, which
have been broadly
accepted by the UK government.
Stimulating and Improving Debate
Wilkinson's work on `social' sex selection stimulated debate amongst the
public and stakeholders
and has enabled improved public understanding via a series of appearances
in popular news
media. The key findings of this work were widely reported in the media and
were made available
via short pieces on the BBC News and This is Staffordshire
websites. In 2010, these pieces in turn
led to considerable media interest with interviews given to more than ten
UK local radio stations, as
well as to BBC Radio 5 Live, the World Service, LBC, BBC Radio Scotland,
the BBC TV News
Channel, and BBC 1 TV's The One Show which at that time had an
audience of around four million
viewers. He also appeared on a 30-minute panel discussion on Voice of
Russia Radio in 2010 to
discuss Sex Selection.
In 2011-12, Wilkinson held a Wellcome Trust Dissemination Award
(£34,000). This grant funded
the following activities:
(a) Two stakeholder engagement seminars (2011). Participants
included representatives or
members of the following groups: (a) Activist, Campaigning, or Educational
Organisations with
special interests in genetic and reproductive technologies (e.g.
Genewatch, Human Genetics Alert,
ProChoice Forum, Progress Educational Trust); (b) Health Care
Professionals (and allied
Researchers) especially those in Reproductive Medicine; (c) Policy and
Regulatory Bodies with
remits or interests in genetic and reproductive technologies (e.g. HFEA,
Nuffield Council on
Bioethics); and (d) Stakeholder Organisations representing people with
disabilities, people with
particular genetic disorders, or actual/prospective recipients of
infertility treatment services.
(b) The creation of a set of accessible and freely available
dissemination essays (2013). On
3rd July 2013, four dissemination essays by Wilkinson and Garrard were
published by Keele
University under the collective title Eugenics and the Ethics of
Selective Reproduction [source 5],
and released in hard and electronic copy. Written for a public audience,
they have enabled
dissemination of Wilkinson's research to hundreds of people in the NHS and
organisations
interested in these ethical debates, such as Progress Educational Trust
who are using the essays
as a source of information in their work promoting ethically sound
research and practice in relation
to genetics.
The ideas articulated in the essays have also been disseminated to the
public through the media:
(a) The essays gained significant and detailed coverage in the international
media in July 2013
including in The Independent (2 page article and front page
banner) [source 6] (78 reader
comments in July 2013) to which The Guardian wrote a response
piece [source 7], and which led
to a debate on Mumsnet with 423 comments in July 2013 [source 8];
The Telegraph (20 reader
comments in July 2013); and Arab Emirates' Top News. It was picked
up internationally on-line and
through syndication in Canada, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Spain, UAE, and
Vietnam (for
example an article was published on Vietnamese Health and Parenting
Website kien thu'c phu nu
on 11th July 2013 [source 9]). There was also extensive
coverage in specialist medical publications
including: Medical Xpress; The British Medical Journal;
and by the PGH Foundation. On 3rd July
2013 Wilkinson participated in radio interviews and debates about the
issues raised in the essays
on several BBC radio stations, including: Radio 4 Today, Radio
London, 5live, and the World
Service.
(b) Blog/Online Publications. The publication of Eugenics and
the Ethics of Selective
Reproduction also led to requests for Wilkinson to write blog posts
and online articles. Wilkinson
wrote pieces for ETHOX [source 10], the Wellcome Trust Blog,
and Bionews, which has 18,000
readers per week. These outlets aim to improve ethical standards,
supporting health professionals
and general education of the public.
Sources to corroborate the impact
Source 1: HL Debs 4 Dec 2007 : Column 1663
Source 2: Joint Committee on the Human Tissue and Embryos (Draft) Bill
(Session 2006-7),
Human Tissue and Embryos (Draft) Bill - Volume 1 - Report, 1st
August 2007, London: The
Stationery Office. And in the Final 2008 Bill, Section 1ZA(1)(d)
Source 3: Parliamentary Inquiry into Abortion on the Grounds of
Disability, July 2013
Source 4: Nuffield Council of Bioethics (2011) Human Bodies donation
for medicine and research.
Source 5: Wilkinson, S. and Garrard, E. (2013) Eugenics and the
Ethics of Selective Reproduction.
Keele University, Keele.
Source 6: The Independent, 3rd July 2013 `Medical
ethicist: Ban on sex selection of IVF embryos is
not justified'.
Source 7: The Guardian, 6th July 2013 `Sex selection
has the potential to skew future generations'.
Source 8: Mumsnet Talk on Mumsnet.com., July 2013 `To say why not
use IVF to choose the sex
of a baby?' http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/a1794177-To-say-why-not-use-IVF-to-choose-the-sex-of-a-baby
Source 9: Vietnamese website Kien thu'c phu nu 10th
July 2013: `So thích con trai con gái trong
mat ng01b0oi ph01b001a1ng Tây': http://doisong.vnexpress.net/tin-tuc/gia-dinh/so-thich-con-trai-con-gai-trong-mat-nguoi-phuong-tay-2846602.html
Source 10: Wilkinson, S. (July 2013) Should we reconsider the UK ban on
sex selection? Ethox
Blog, The Ethox Centre. http://www.ethox.org.uk/ethox-blog/should-we-reconsider-the-uk-ban-on-sex-selection
Corroborators:
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
Dialogue by Design
Progress Educational Trust