Queensland's new Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill

A bill has been introduced into Queensland's Parliament to regulate IVF clinics and to set up a central donor registry.

The Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill 2024 has already been considered by a parliamentary committee, and is expected to be debated in August and enacted before the state election due in October.

Repeal donor anonymity
If enacted, the bill will enable donor-conceived people aged 16 or over to learn the identity of their donor – even if donation was anonymous. Retrospective transparency is intended to cover all donations, dating back to when sperm donation commenced in Queensland, estimated to be in the late 1970s or early 1980s.

Gamete donation was anonymous until 2004, since when the donor-conceived people have been able to access identifying information from age 18. In 2022 a state Parliamentary committee – the same one reviewed this bill – recommended that there be a central registry to be run by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, and retrospective transparency. Those recommendations were accepted by the state Government.

It was acknowledged that many of the earliest records kept by doctors may shine little light on donors, recipients, and how many donations from individuals were undertaken before a cap of ten families was imposed in 2004.

Donor-conceived adults have been adamant that their voices be heard, and that they be able to find out where they came from. Queensland will join Victoria, South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory in having retrospective transparency for donations. The age of 16 was chosen to be consistent with the age people can access their birth records.

When I gave evidence to the committee in 2022, I said that to know one's genetic origins was a human right, and that with the rise of DNA databases, the notion of anonymity is dead. The use of photo scraping tools, such as Google reverse image searches, has reinforced this.

Licensing fertility clinics
In licensing IVF clinics, Queensland will join the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia. Licensing is in addition to the requirement of accreditation of IVF clinics by the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand.

Health Minister Shannon Fentiman made a commitment last year to enact laws for the licensing of IVF clinics this year, following a series of stories alleging the wrong sperm had been used (see BioNews 1245), or a large number of children had been born from one donor. It seems that most of these stories arose from practices before changes were put in place in 2004.

Regulation of IVF clinics includes requiring the written consent of the donor to export of gametes or embryos. There will be mandatory reporting to the State of serious adverse events. Assisted reproductive technology services for children, except for fertility preservation, will be prohibited, as will sex selection for non-medical reasons.

Use of gametes from close family members will be prohibited, and there will be a limit of ten families Australia-wide for the use of donor gametes. That number is consistent with other Australian states (except New South Wales and Western Australia, which have a limit of five).

Posthumous gamete retrieval
The bill will make posthumous retrieval of gametes easier, and enables retrieval for the first time from those who are unresponsive – but only if they are on a respirator or their blood circulation is maintained in a hospital by artificial means. Clearance must also be given by a specified doctor at the hospital, and the retrieved gametes may only be used in fertility treatment by the spouse, or a surrogate on behalf of the spouse. I had sought these changes.

Posthumous retrieval is currently possible under human tissue laws, or by Supreme Court order. Most are done under human tissue laws. This has been challenging in Queensland because retrieval can only occur after death, often with the coroner's consent first, at which time the officer of the morgue or hospital, the fertility doctor (only a few of whom do posthumous retrievals) or urologist (again only a few of whom do posthumous retrievals) and scientist must be assembled quickly. When that time is 8pm on a Friday night, as happened recently, this can be a challenge.

I wrote to the Minister last year, setting out a couple of case examples where retrieval could not be obtained. In one, the man was unresponsive, and would not recover. The doctor wanted to retrieve before death (likely in a few days), as the fear was that the quality of sperm would greatly diminish. Retrieval before death was not lawful. By the time of death, the doctor's fears were realised: no viable sperm were able to be recovered.

Queensland is a very large state, twice the size of Texas. In the other case, it proved impossible, on a Friday to assemble both the fertility doctor (in one town) and the scientist (in another town) in time. I had to tell the widow that due to the time pressures and the tyranny of distance, her late husband's sperm could not be retrieved.

Hopefully the retrieval changes will mean those in the position of those widows will be able to retrieve viable gametes.

Posthumous use will require approval by an independent review body, likely under regulation to be an independent fertility counsellor or lawyer.

Finally, the bill will repeal a law that allows discrimination in access to fertility treatment based on sexual orientation and relationship status. I first called for this provision to be repealed eight years ago, and have pressed its repeal ever since. It is a delight to see that this discriminatory provision might be assigned to the scrapheap.