MPs claimed the law still violates their ethical beliefs.
Embryos determined to be carrying a rare genetic disease will be frozen instead, but may be available for adoption.
I feel it is disrespectful to both the general public and, more importantly, to persons undergoing IVF treatment for certain MPs to make utterly inaccurate, unsubstantiated claims implying that the new law would offer prospective parents the opportunity to change and choose their ideal kids, when the proposed amendments explicitly limit what PGT may be used against nine inherited disorders that would significantly affect the quality of life of the child who would be born.
Adrian Delia stated that he will vote according to his conscience since he is opposed to embryo experimentation, which endangers human life.
Should they or should they not go against their ethical principles?
Jamie vella expressed “As a prospective parent you would do whatever you could to ensure your child will have a good, healthy life. But what if you knew that your unborn child would have a condition that severely impacted their quality of life?”
Here the MPs would only be “taking a stand in favour of all those trying to become parents, but also displaying a sense of understanding and empathy with these same persons and their struggles.”
What do you think of this?