[ad_1]
The amendments to the assisted reproduction law, which propose to abandon the permanent storage of embryos created for assisted reproduction, were registered in the Seimas by the Speaker of the Seimas, leader of the Liberal Movement Viktorija Čmilytė-Nielsen, her partner Arminas Lydeka, Freedom La representative party Morgana Danielė and conservative Seimas Morgana Danielė.
Under these amendments, embryos would be stored for a minimum of two years and a maximum of 10 years, unless the spouses or partners wish to extend this period.
It is proposed that assisted reproductive services, including medical consultations, examinations, treatment, application of medical technology, as well as embryo preparation and storage services, be reimbursed at public expense.
Supports state reimbursement for services
Rita Tamašunienė, the oldest of the opposition faction of the Seimas del Seimas, affirms that she supports the latter proposal.
Photo by Rokas Lukoševičius / 15min / Rita Tamašunienė
“It just came to our attention then. Such a change would, in my opinion, be better. ” 15 minutes the politician commented.
But, according to her, there should be no time limit for embryo storage.
“The bill, which was passed on the view that human life is paramount, is, in my opinion, too early to change. It is too short and should remain unchanged until we find more effective solutions, ”he said, noting that the Group of Regions had not yet adopted a common position on embryo conservation.
The opposition Social Democrats also do not have a common position, but according to the largest of their faction, Algirdas Sysas, the proposals that are made are logical.
Sigismund Gedvila / 15min photo / Algirdas Sysas
“It just came to our knowledge then. I don’t support eternal embryo storage: a person dies, the embryo remains. There is no logic. <...>
I think 10 years is enough for a family that cannot have children to take advantage not of one of the various invasions, but to have supplies, “said A. Sys.
I think there will be an ethical problem.
Vaida Giraitytė, a member of the opposition faction of the Labor Party in the Seimas, also expressed support for the temporary storage of embryos.
“I would personally support such liberalization, but I could only say the general opinion of the group when we all consider it,” he said.
According to the politician, the proposed regulation would not worsen the situation, since the embryos could be stored for more than 10 years at the request of the couples:
“At the individual request of a family or an individual, that period can be extended. I don’t think it will really make the situation worse, but it may speed up the processes and increase the number of users.”
Personally, I would support such liberalization.
However, Vilija Aleknaitė-Abramikienė, representative of the ruling conservatives in the Seimas, was skeptical of the amendments.
“After 10 years, the question will arise of what to do with the embryos, or will they be destroyed or used for some kind of experiments. And this is a great ethical issue, “said the politician.
There was almost unanimous support for perpetual storage
How many members of the Christian wing of the Union of the Homeland-Lithuanian Christian Democrats (TS-LKD) might disagree with the ruling initiative, he said he could not say.
Photo by Lukas Balandis / 15min / Vilija Aleknaitė-Abramikienė
Saulius Skvernelis, the largest of the Seimas “Vardan tos” democratic faction, did not comment on the content of the amendments to the Assisted Fertilization Act, he assured that he still does not know it.
The obligation to store unused embryos for an indefinite period was enacted by the Seimas in January 2017.
The parliamentarians voted for her in the factions of LVŽS, Social Democrats, Electoral Action-Union of Christian Families of Lithuanian Poles, as well as members of the factions Order and Justice, Liberal Movement, TS-LKD.
Only Linas Balsys, who worked in the Joint Group of deputies of the Seimas, and V. Čmilytė-Nielsen, representative of the Liberal Movement, abstained from voting, who had already expressed their opposition to the eternal preservation of the embryos.
[ad_2]
