Minutes of the Council meeting held on 13 March 2003
Mon, 31 March 2003
Council (03) 2nd Meeting
NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS
Minutes of the Meeting held at 28 Bedford Square London WC1B 3EG
on 13 March 2003 at 10.30 am
PRESENT
Professor Bob Hepple QC (Chairman)
Professor Catherine Peckham (Deputy Chair)
Professor Tom Baldwin; Professor Sir Kenneth Calman; The Rt Reverend Richard Harries; Professor Peter Lipton; Baroness Perry of Southwark; Professor Martin Raff; Professor Dame Marilyn Strathern; Mr Nick Ross; Professor Peter Smith; Professor Albert Weale
APOLOGIES
Professor Herbert Sewell; Dr Alan Williamson
SECRETARIAT
Dr Sandy Thomas, Tor Lezemore, Harald Schmidt, Nicola Perrin, Natalie Bartle, Julia Fox and
Elaine Talaat-Abdalla
The Chairman welcomed Baroness Perry, now serving on the Council in her capacity as Chair of the Working Party on The ethics of research involving animals and Professor Peter Smith, joining Council for his first meeting as a member. He also reminded members of the Council that this meeting would be followed by a farewell lunch for Professor Martin Bobrow and Professor John Ledingham.
MINUTES OF (03) 1st MEETING
1 It was agreed that the Minutes were an accurate record of the previous meeting.
MATTERS ARISING
Joint meeting with the Human Genetics Commission
2 This meeting had now been arranged for 10 June, from 2.00 pm to 4.00 pm (preceded by a sandwich lunch at 1.00 pm) at 28 Bedford Square. The Chairman and Deputy Chair would attend along with two or three members of Council. Members who would like to attend should notify the Secretariat. The meeting in 2002 had proved to be most useful for both organisations.
Reaching out to young people
3 Although the proposed initiative had received wide support from the Council, only Professor Sir Kenneth Calman had agreed to become involved. It was necessary to recruit at least one other Council member before invitations could be extended externally. Nick Ross and Professor Catherine Peckham both agreed to be included.
Forward Look Seminar
4 The Chairman had invited Baroness Onora O’Neill to speak at the Council’s Forward Look Seminar on Public health ethics and she had now accepted. He had also invited Lord May to speak on Incentives and obstacles to bio-medical research. Lord May also accepted in principle, although because of other commitments he might only be available for one hour. These sessions would be held in the morning and the Chairman suggested that discussion on these topics could continue in the afternoon. Consideration in the afternoon should also be given to other topics for future Working Parties. Members who would like to suggest topics for discussion were invited to send an outline of half a page to the Secretariat.
CHAIRMAN’S ITEMS
MEMBERSHIP
Council (03) 16
5 The Chairman reported that the Sub-group on membership had had a useful meeting. The aim of the meeting was to address the gaps in expertise which now existed in the Council. New members were required from the fields of medical genetics and law. An additional member with expertise in philosophy was also needed. A number of names considered at the meeting were being followed up. If members of the Council had additional suggestions for new members these should be passed to the Secretariat.
MAIN BUSINESS
WORKSHOP ON END OF LIFE
Council (03) 17
6 The Chairman reported that the programme had been revised with the intention of focussing the topic on the theme of prolonging life. There was a need to consider participants for the Workshop which would now take place on the 12 June. The proposed programme was then discussed. There was support for the inclusion of a consideration of euthanasia. Members were reminded that the House of Lords had considered the subject of euthanasia in 1993 and that Baroness Knight was introducing a Private Member’s Bill seeking to prohibit the withholding or withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration from patients with the intention of causing the death of the patient. There was also a view that the limitation of the prolongation of life issues to neonates was too simplistic and that consideration should also be given to foetuses. It was agreed that the topic of euthanasia should be included in the programme, as a background to the specific issue of prolonging life expectancy.
7 The Workshop would allow a preliminary discussion of the issues and provide the opportunity to identify where the focus of a Working Party should be. On this occasion it might be too ambitious to expect a draft terms of reference to be produced.
8 It was agreed that it would be helpful if a background paper could be prepared in advance. Each presenter should be asked to state what the major developments are relating to their areas of expertise and to give consideration to what they see as the ethical dilemmas.
9 Possible attendees were then discussed and additional names were suggested. It was agreed that it would be desirable to invite one or more person with knowledge of non-Christian perspectives. (These perspectives should also inform the broader work of the Council and would be considered as a future agenda item). There was also a need at the Workshop to consider the perspective of nurses who had to implement the decisions made on the prolongation of life.
HRRDC II SOUTH AFRICA
10 The Director reported that the proposed Conference would take place in October and that the SA MRC had agreed to co-host the meeting. The draft programme was now being finalised together with a proposal for funding which would be sent to possible sponsors. Professor Sir Kenneth Calman commented that the meeting would provide an excellent opportunity to follow up the Council’s Report The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries and to consider the broader implications of recent guidance. A background paper comparing elements of current guidance would be prepared by an Intern during the Summer. This would be circulated prior to the meeting. The discussion at the meeting would be recorded and form the basis of a new Discussion Paper.
WORKING PARTY ON THE ETHICS OF RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMALS
Council (03) 19
11 Baroness Perry, Chair of the Working Party, reported that good progress had been made at the first meeting. She was pleased to report that drafting of the chapters of the proposed Report had already begun. Consideration had been given to the consultation process. The Working Party had agreed that consultation involving schools should be pursued and this would be considered more fully at the next meeting.
12 The Council endorsed the idea of consulting young people.
13 The Chairman Invited members to comment on the revised terms of reference which had been modified at the first meeting of the Working Party. Baroness Perry pointed out that the Working Party had been keen to shorten the terms of reference while retaining the essential elements. There was some discussion abut point 3 which dealt with the cost and benefits of research involving animals. There was a need to listen to those who argued that benefits to society would not be attainable without animal research as well as those who argued for alternatives. Baroness Perry also explained that the revised point 5 and 6 now covered the previous point 6. It was agreed that the new terms of reference were broad enough to cover those areas of the topic that the Working Party wished to address (attached).
WORKSHOP ON PHARMACOGENETICS: ETHICAL ISSUES
Council (03) 20
14 The Chairman of the Working Party, Professor Peter Lipton summarised the progress of the Working Party. Three meetings had been held together with three fact-finding meetings. Eighty responses to the consultation had been received and the majority were of a high standard. A meeting of the Working Party would take place later that day along with a fact-finding session on the legal issues. After the draft report was revised, it would go out to peer review. The draft Report would also be sent to Council for a further review as the previous draft circulated in January had not taken account of the responses to the consultation. The final meeting would be in May. Further redrafting would take place and the Report would be presented to the meeting of the Council on the 25 June for signing off.
GM CROPS II
Council (03) 21
15 The Director explained the current regulatory context for the commercial introduction of GM crops in Europe. The debate in the UK was now taking place and strategic reviews from the Government would be published in September. A decision about the commercial introduction of GM crops to the UK was expected thereafter. The Council would publish a Discussion Paper in September (moved forward from June). The Working Group were giving close attention to the issues relating to the application of GM technology in developing countries In the light of the recommendations and conclusions in the 1999 Report. The Paper would be 15-20 pages in length.
16 The Working Group had proposed that the Council participate in the public debate which would take place in June and July by placing a final draft of the paper on the website for comment. This would be the final draft for comment, not a consultation process. It had already been agreed that the Chairman, Dr Alan Williamson and Nick Ross would sign the Paper on behalf of the Council.
17 Members then considered how the Council should respond to comments made on the draft to be released on the website in June. If new evidence or relevant examples were cited, these could be taken into account.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS INTERNATIONAL
INITIATIVE
Council (03) 22
18 The Paper was introduced by Professor Sir Kenneth Calman who had put this idea forward some time ago. It had received some discussion at the meeting of the Council in Glasgow. The proposal envisaged interaction with a group of international experts who could provide useful advice on some occasions. Interaction could be virtual with occasional face to face meetings.
19 It was agreed that inviting specific experts from overseas to Forward Look Seminars might have value, and that consideration should be given to the means of broadening the Council’s international perspectives.
BI-LATERAL MEETING WITH CCNE
20 The CCNE had responded to the letter from the Council and put forward a number of possible topics for discussion at a one day meeting. The most appropriate time would be in the Spring of 2004.
TO REPORT
INTERN REPORT: GM CROPS II
Council (03) 23
21 The Report, prepared by Ms Kate Miller following her internship in the Secretariat to assist in the preparation of the Paper on GM Crops was noted by members of the Council.
BIOETHICS BRIEFING: ACTIVITIES OF OTHER ORGANISATIONS
Council (03) 24
22 The Briefing was received and noted.
FINANCIAL REPORT: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS TO 31 JANUARY 2003
Council (03) 25
23 The Management Accounts for the period up to the 31 January 2003 were received and noted.
COUNCIL’S REVISED DRAFT WORK PLAN FOR 2003
Council (03) 26
24 The Council’s revised Draft Work Plan was received and noted.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
DANISH COUNCIL ON ETHICS PROPOSED COLLABORATIVE MEETING
25 The Director reported that the Danish Council on Ethics had contact the Secretariat about the possibility of holding a joint Workshop or Conference to discuss the patenting of DNA. It was agreed that such an event would be worthwhile and provide a valuable opportunity to work more closely with colleagues from Europe. The Danish Council proposed to undertake most of the organisation and seek funding from the European Commission. It was agreed that the proposed meeting should take place in 2004.
FACE TRANSPLANTS
26 It was agreed that the question whether the Council should consider the issue could be discussed at the Forward Look Seminar.
FOR INFORMATION
QUARTERELY BULLETIN
Information (03) 03
27 The Quarterly Bulletin was noted.
WEB REPORT
Information (03) 04
28 The web report figures were noted.
REMAINING MEETING DATES FOR 2003
Council meetings:
Wednesday 25 June
Thursday 16 October
all at 10.30 am, followed by lunch
Forward Look Seminar
Thursday 15 May
Full-day meeting at the Royal Society of Arts
Working Party on The ethics of research involving animals
Terms of Reference
1. To review recent, current and prospective developments in the scientific use of non-human animals, including genetic modification or cloning;
2. To assess the ethical implications of these developments, and, in doing so, to consider arguments about the differing status of various non-human animals and the implications of such arguments on their use in research;
3. To examine ways of assessing the costs and benefits of the scientific use of non-human animals;
4. To assess ways of regulating and enhancing good practice;
5. To assess the ethical implications of using alternatives to animals in different fields of research;
6. To identify and review developments and differences internationally in the use of animals in research and its regulation;
7. To explore ways of stimulating public debate and providing information and education about the issues involved.
Last Updated Mon, 7 June 2004