The HFEA debate

I was really sorry to have to miss the recent debate organised by Progress Educational Trust on the future of the HFEA, and so was pleased to find a write up of the evening in this week's edition of Bionews.  It was clearly a lively and interesting debate - it may only be a snapshot view but it's interesting that those working in fertility clinics seemed keenest to be rid of the HFEA, while those on the outside were keener for it to remain.  I'd be the first to agree that streamlining and change are both necessary, but it's far too easy to focus on the negatives and to forget all of the good work that the HFEA has done and continues to do.

One of the speakers apparently claimed that people were travelling overseas for treatment because of over-regulation by the HFEA in the UK.  Having spoken to many people who've opted to have treatment abroad, I can't remember hearing one of them mention "over-regulation" as an issue - excessive costs and waiting lists were more likely to come up as reasons for having treatment abroad, as well as higher success rates in some other places and being treated as an equal by consultants.

Sadly the one thing that wasn't mentioned in the reporting of the evening was patient information, and I don't know whether this cropped up at all.  For most fertility patients, information provision is one of the most important functions of the HFEA.  It's the publication of success rates, the reliable information about new treatments and the calm response to fertility scare stories that is so vital - and yet it seems to be the one thing that most of the experts discussing this seem to entirely overlook.