NHMRC Public Consultations

Skip Navigation and go to Content
Visit NHMRC website

Draft Ethical guidelines on the use of assisted reproductive technology in clinical practice and research submission

ID: 
93
This submission reflects the views of
Organisation Name: 
Australian Medical Association
Personal Details
Comment on specific Sections, clauses or sentences of the draft revised Draft Ethical guidelines
Specific Comments: 
Appendix 3a

In relation to sex-selection for non-medical purposes, the AMA advocates that genetic selection should not be undertaken on the basis of sex (except in order to avoid hereditary sex-linked disease) or on the basis of characteristics that are unrelated to disease. 

Appendix 3b

In relation to compensation for Australian women for the reproductive effort and risks associated with egg donation, the AMA considers it inappropriate to offer money or benefits in kind to encourage donation but donors may be reimbursed for reasonable expenses. 

General Comments
General Comments: 

The AMA commends the NH&MRC on its public consultation in relation to the Ethical Guidelines on the Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology in Clinical Practice and Research. We acknowledge assisted reproductive technology (ART) can be an ethically and legally challenging area of medical practice and appreciate your well-considered two stage public consultation on the guidelines.

The guidelines are very comprehensive and well-written. While we do not have any comments to provide on the guidelines themselves, we will comment on two of the ‘issues for further consideration on the clinical practice of ART’; namely, sex-selection for non-medical purposes as well as the compensation of Australian women for egg donation. The AMA’s relevant policies can be found in the AMA Position Statement on Ethical Issues in Reproductive Medicine 2013 (available at www.ama.com.au). The AMA does not have a policy position on the establishment of an Australian donor egg bank. 

Page reviewed: 20 April, 2017