Whenever a free vote comes up in Parliament, not whipped along Party lines, MPs should tell voters how they voted and why.

I believe that the Human Fertilization and Embryology Bill has huge potential for helping with the treatment of terrible and hitherto incurable diseases. Charities concerned with patients who suffer from Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimers and other such conditions are urging MPs to support the Bill.

As a scientist by training, and an MP who regularly deals with constituents who are anxious about the deterioration of their loved ones, I support the Bill as it stands. If we can use technology to advance human health, we should.

‘Saviour siblings’ and mixed species hybrids (which can exist for up to 14 days) will be allowed but rigorously controlled by this Bill.

The Bill includes no clauses on abortion. However, some MPs want to change the Bill to reduce the legal time limit for abortions. I disagree with them and I oppose all of these amendments.

Although I want to see the number of abortions reduced, I will not vote to turn women in very difficult situations into potential criminals. Reducing the limit from 24 weeks to 20 would reduce abortions by just 1.5% - assuming no abortion would take place earlier as a result of a lower limit. We should reduce the need for abortions by improving access to contraception, advice and women’s control over their own fertility generally.

Late abortions are often those where the mother’s health is at risk if the pregnancy continues. We must not take the right to abortion away in these cases.

Finally, same-sex partners already have the right to be recognised as the legal parents of adopted children. The Bill gives them the same right in respect of a child conceived by artificial or donor insemination. This is sensible and should be non-controversial.