Latest update: 09/02/2011 

- French politics - health - science - Stem cells - technology


France's first 'saviour sibling' stirs ethical debate about biotechnology

The country’s first "saviour sibling", a healthy boy whose discarded umbilical cord will help heal one of his two siblings from a genetic blood disease, has brought complicated ethical issues over biotechnology to the forefront in France.

By Antoine MARIOTTI / Yuka ROYER (video)
Joseph BAMAT (text)
 

France’s first so-called "saviour sibling" was born in a hospital in the Parisian suburb of Clamart in late January, doctors announced Tuesday. The baby, whose blood stem cells will help cure one of his siblings from a severe genetic blood disease, has also opened a new front in the bioethics debate in France.

Born to parents of Turkish origin and named Umut Talha (Turkish for "our hope"), the child was conceived under circumstances that would have been unthinkable only a generation ago.

Umut Talha’s parents approached the hospital in Clamart a little more than a year ago with a serious problem: their two young children were both afflicted with an inherited blood disorder, Beta thalassemia, which requires monthly blood transfusions. The parents knew the hospital was one of only three in France that was developing a treatment for their children's illness.

An embryo was screened and genetically selected from an original group of 12 embryos. It was picked to ensure it did not carry the gene for Beta thalassemia, but also based on its compatibility with the sick siblings. Besides selecting an offspring that would be spared from the disorder, the parents hoped the future baby would also become a donor of the right kind of treatment cells.

In the end the boy was born disorder-free, and his cells were confirmed to be compatible with his older sister, now aged two. Doctors feel confident that Umut’s sister will be cured with the cells from his discarded umbilical cord, and her monthly blood transfusions will be discontinued.

The family have since returned to their home in southern France, but they plan to return to Clamart to undergo the same procedure to cure their other child, Umut’s four-year-old brother.

Hopes and hurdles

French newspapers spread “medicine baby” across headlines on Tuesday. But speaking at a press conference René Frydman, a fertility pioneer and father of the first French test-tube baby, who also oversaw Umut’s case, said he preferred the term “double-hope baby”.

“Medicine baby is a media term invented by people who are against this kind of procedure,” Frydman told reporters. In English-speaking countries, the terms “donor baby” and “saviour sibling” have been widely used in the media.

For Frydman, Umut represents a double hope for his parents: the hope of having a new, healthy baby, and the hope of curing one of their sick children. But other scientists, religious groups and parents beg to differ.

The issue of saviour babies has raised complex ethical debates, and renewed fears of a move towards “designer babies”, or babies whose traits – such as intelligence, eye-colour and height – have been predetermined.

The timing of Umut's birth could be significant. The very law that allows for cases like Umut’s is being revised starting today. Observers say that the existing legislation guiding biotechnology in France may be tightened and restrict research in certain fields, including stem cells.

The country’s standing bioethics law allows for cases like Umut’s. In fact, the government has earmarked 800,000 euros per year for Clamart to practice and develop the procedure.

But Frydman and his colleagues say a lot more needs to be done, complaining of endless hurdles to launch further research and access funds. They regret that France has started a decade after the United States and that the government is still reluctant to give them its full backing.

Umut Talha, France's first-ever "saviour baby" was born on Jan. 26 at Antoine Béclère Hospital in Clamart, in the suburbs of Paris. (Photo: Joseph Bamat)
René Frydman (centre), a fertility pioneer and the main doctor in charge of Umut’s case, announced the child's birth on Feb. 7. (Photo: Joseph Bamat)
Frydman called on French lawmakers, who are revising existing laws governing biotechnology, to lighten the bureaucratic burden on doctors and researchers. (Photo: Joseph Bamat)
    Read more
    React to the article
    Comment this article typing your message in the above text zone. Please note that this is limited to 1500 characters or less.
    (3) Reactions

    Science to the rescue

    Let's get a few things straight. The baby was not "designed", it was selected from among potential embryos, big difference. We're decades away from actually (genetically) designing human beings. From my reading of the story, the baby was not conceived with the express goal of being a cell donor, rather it was selected so that there could be a side benefit of its cells being capable of curing the disease of its siblings. At bottom, this is not different than using your siblings cut hair for a wig. If you're gonna have a kid anyways, might as well get the biggest bang the buck: no genetic disorder and potential donor.

    @Appalled: Parents "should realize that sickness and death are an intrinsic part of life"? Perhaps, but that says nothing against trying to either cure or prevent sickness and premature death. That genetic diseases are part of life is not to say that it ought be part of life that we submit to. By this same line of reasoning the poor of Afghanistan and other nations should be just as content with their lot, as their suffering is "an intrinsic part of life" just the same.
    You are right, they are very lucky to live in a prosperous country that allows for such amazing treatment options. But its a long way from that to saying that they should be denied the option because of that luck. Furthermore, I don't think "luxury" is the right word here: is the sibling waiting for the potential treatment for his genetic blood disease to be seen as receiving a luxury? I have a hard time accepting this.

    'saviour baby'

    This is sick. One more sick symptom of a thoroughly sick society, where the rest of the world can die of hunder, lack of the most basic medical treatment,or our bombs and mines, as long as our own private wishes are satisfied. The scientists's wishes to experiment -and preferable have a 'world first' discovery, and the parents'wishes to be spared having sick children (whose sorrow at having genetically sick children is understandable and legitimate, but who should realize that sickness and death are an intrinsic part of life and that they are incredibly lucky to at least live in a prosperous country where there children can receive treatment, as opposed to millions of parents who cannot even get treatment for their children when they have a simple pneumonia and have to watch them die instead).
    Give the truly poor and desperate parents of this world a chance and only after their basic needs have been satisfied, move on to 'luxury' cases like this one.
    I work in Afghanistan, so I know what I am talking about.

    Get used to it.

    What a wonderful thing to grow up knowing you gave your family such a fantastic gift. As to designer babies why not? The child above was" designed " not to have a disease so he could have a normal life. What is the big deal to give your child blonde hair or blue eyes? High I.Q. and being free of disease would be nice too. Think of the money saved on hair dyes and color contacts. But with perfect eyes we won't need those. Don't be afraid of Eden. We have been kicked out it far too long.

    Close