On this page you will find information regarding the ‘need for a father’ debate in the Bill.
The Progess Educational Trust and Natalie Gamble, leading fertility law expert with Lester Aldridge LLP, against the ‘need for a father’ amendments
The PET and Natalie Gamble urge Parliament to reject any amendments to the Bill which would require a ‘need for a father’ clause. They argue that the propsed amendments are inherently discrimminatory towards single women and lesbian couples.
For more on this see: Need for a Father
The British Medical Association supports removal of the ‘need for a father’ clause
The BMA supports the need for fertiliy clinics to consider the welfare of the resultant child, but says that the ‘need for a father clause’ ought to be removed. This would recognise the changes in social attitude which have taken place.
See more here: BMA Briefing Child Welfare and the Need for a Father
Leading fertility lawyer urges MPs to reject the need for a father
Leading fertility lawyer Natalie Gamble of law firm Lester Aldridge LLP, is urging MPs to vote in favour of the government’s proposals to delete the obligation of fertility doctors to consider the ‘need for a father’ before offering treatment.
See more here: Need for a Father
Dad not included: should the need for a father be enshrined in law?
Text of a paper given by natalie gamble at a prgress Educational Trust debate in the Houses of Parliament on 14 Jan 2008.
