The Adelaide submission to the Commission on Assisted Reproduction challenges much of the teaching of the Catholic church on reproduction, and focuses attention on the commission, which has generated little discussion since it was set up almost two years ago.
The Human Life in Pregnancy Bill, designed to deal with the abortion issue and the related referendum, refers throughout to human life after implantation in the womb.
Asked at the press conference what this meant for the embryo before implantation, the Minister for Health, Mr Martin, said that all matters relating to an embryo before implantation would be dealt with by this commission.
The position of the Catholic church is that human life begins at conception, the moment the sperm and the egg meet. It therefore opposes any kind of interference with the embryo from the moment of conception.
One form of infertility treatment, in vitro fertilisation, involves the extraction of eggs from the woman's womb, their fertilisation outside it, and then their implantation back in the womb. Archbishop Desmond Connell has already publicly expressed his opposition to such a procedure.
One of the reasons for such opposition is that the procedure involves the production of surplus embryos. These are frozen, and can be implanted later.
However, not all are implanted, and considerable controversy has been generated in Britain and elsewhere about their destruction. According to the Adelaide submission, "It is the responsibility of the mother and partner, in consultation with their doctor, to decide on the future of surplus embryos."
They also can be, and in certain countries are, used for stem cell research. A debate is currently taking place in the EU about controls on such research.
The Catholic church is vehemently opposed to it. The Adelaide submission explicitly endorses it for embryos up to 14 days old, albeit under strict licensing and control.
The submission also endorses the screening of embryos for genetic conditions. The implication of such screening is that if an embryo is found to carry a genetic condition causing severe handicap, the parents would have the choice not to proceed with implantation.
The submission states in this context: "The Adelaide Hospital Society believes that parents are entitled to the fullest possible information in respect of the genetic conditions affecting their children."
Although this falls outside the strict confines of assisted human reproduction, this statement could imply that such screening could also take place after implantation. That already happens with amniocentesis, a test of the fluid surrounding the foetus in the womb for Down's Syndrome. In Britain, where such a test proves positive the parents are offered a termination of the pregnancy. Such genetic testing is therefore opposed by the Catholic church.
The Adelaide submission is also likely to cause controversy with its approach to other forms of infertility treatment. Artificial insemination by donor sperm is already used in this state.
This is also opposed by the Catholic church, as it contravenes its teaching on the procreation of children only within marriage. Referring to this procedure, the submission states, "the Adelaide Hospital Society favours strictly controlled donor programmes." It also leaves open the possibility that such procedures should be open to unmarried couples, and even same-sex couples, by not excluding any family form.
The submission states: "There is a need to regulate availability of the services in the interests of the children who may be born as a result of them. There should be a professional assessment of the stability of the relationships. Such an assessment should be sensitive and confidential and take into account the changing nature of the family in society."
The profound philosophical differences between the approach of the Adelaide Hospital Society and that of the Catholic Church is spelled out in this submission. It criticises the very term "unborn" as having no scientific meaning, and describes the "development of the human person as a process".
Thus, "the legal and moral implications must evolve and increase as that development occurs," meaning that different levels of protection would be invoked at different stages of development.
That also has implications for the abortion debate. Because of the complexity of the issues, and the delicacy of the relationship between the individuals involved and their doctors, the Adelaide Hospital Society opposes this area being regulated by statute at all. Instead, it should be regulated by a special, permanent commission representative of all the interests involved. This would remove it from the political arena.