Politics, Prohibitions and the Lost Public Perspective: A Comment on Bill C-56: The Assisted Human Reproduction Act
![handle is hein.journals/alblr40 and id is 461 raw text is: BILL C-56: THE ASSISTED HUMAN REPRODUCTION ACT 451
POLITICS, PROHIBITIONS AND THE LOST PUBLIC
PERSPECTIVE: A COMMENT ON BILL C-56:
THE ASSISTED HUMAN REPRODUCTION ACT
TIMOTHY CAULFIELD*
I. INTRODUCTION
On 9 May 2002, the federal government released its long-awaited Bill on
reproductive technologies. As expected, Bill C-56, An Act respecting assisted human
reproduction,' has generated a significant amount of controversy. There are those who
feel it is too restrictive, thus inappropriately impeding scientific research. Others have
suggested that the government needs to go further by limiting when embryonic stem
(ES) cell research can occur.
The Bill covers a wide range of issues, from the banning of commercial surrogacy2
to the regulation of most activities related to assisted reproduction.' However, the
provisions addressing human cloning and stem cell research have attracted the most
attention. Given the degree of social controversy surrounding the legislation and its long
and troubled history,4 the Bill was destined to be a compromise - neither completely
satisfying those, myself included, who had hoped for a more nuanced approach to the
Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Faculty
of Medicine and Dentistry, Research Director, Health Law Institute, University of Alberta. I would
like to thank Abdallah Daar, Bartha Maria Knoppers, Peter Singer, Francoise Baylis, and the HLI
team for their assistance and insight and the Stem Cell Network, Genome Prairie, and the Alberta
Heritage Foundation for Medical Research for their research support.
1st Sess. 37th Parl., 2002 (lst reading 9 May 2002) [hereinafter the Bill].
2 Ibid., s. 6.
Ibid., s. 10. This section provides that [n]o person shall, except in accordance with the regulations
and a licence, alter, manipulate or treat any human reproductive material for the purpose of
creating an embryo.
The Bill's beginnings can be traced to recommendations made by the 1993 Royal Commission on
New Reproductive Technologies. See Canada, Proceed with Care: Final Report of the Royal
Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (Ottawa: Royal Commission on New Reproductive
Technologies, 1993) [hereinafter Proceed with Care]. In 1996, the Government introduced Bill C-
47, An Act respecting human reproductive technologies and commercial transactions relating to
human reproduction, 2d Sess., 35th ParI., 1996. This Bill, which was not unlike Bill C-56, died
when the 1997 federal election was called. In May of 2001, the government released Canada,
Proposal for Legislation Governing Assisted Human Reproduction: Draft Legislation (Ottawa:
Health Canada, 2001), online: Health Canada Online <www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/reproduction/
legislation.pdf> (date accessed: 30 June 2002). The hope was that the Proposal would stimulate
public input. In addition, it set the framework for consultation and analysis by the Standing
Committee on Health. From May until December 2001, the Standing Committee on Health heard
testimony on the Proposal from a wide variety of individuals, including scientists, legal scholars,
clinicians, ethicists, and public representatives. In December 2001, the Committee released the
report Canada, Assisted Human Reproduction: Building Families (Ottawa: House of Commons
Canada, 2001) (Chair: B. Brown), online: Standing Committee on Health <www.parl.gc.ca/
InfoComDoc/37/l/HEAL/Studies/Reports/healrpOl-e.htm> (date accessed: 30 June 2002)
[hereinafter Standing Committee on Health].](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/alblr40&div=23&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Politics, Prohibitions and the Lost Public Perspective: A Comment on Bill C-56: The Assisted Human Reproduction Act
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most