Woman's new hope for dead husband's baby

In the first sign of a possible climbdown, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority is to examine detailed evidence in the case of Diane Blood, the widow it banned from having a baby using her dead husband's sperm.

The rethink might enable Mrs Blood to go abroad to have the treatment, even though her husband Stephen had not signed a written consent when the sperm was taken from him as he lay in a coma in March last year.

Mrs Blood, 30, from Worksop, Nottinghamshire, plans to use a clinic in Brussels if she eventually gets the go-ahead for the pregnancy.

She told a news conference: "It's really good news that they're looking at it again and have asked for my evidence. The fact that they've asked for it suggests to me that they want to look at the individual and very unique circumstances of my case."

The authority said in a statement that it had discretion to consider any additional information with regard to exporting the sperm, and had written to Mrs Blood's solicitors inviting them to submit further evidence. The 21-member authority is expected come to a decision before Christmas.

Earlier in the day she sat in the public gallery at the House of Commons listening to MPs debate the issues raised by her case.

During the speeches, Labour's Joe Ashton, who represents Mrs Blood's constituency, Bassetlaw, protested that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority had made the law "look like an ass" by its handling of the case.

However Tory Dame Jill Knight insisted the interests of children had to be "paramount" and warned for a child "to have to take on board the fact that he was born from a dead man . . . would be enough I think to occasion nightmares in that child."

Liberal Democrat David Alton said the HFEA had failed to "uphold the dignity and sacredness of human life" and behaved in an "arrogant and unaccountable manner".

The Shadow Health Minister,Tessa Jowell, said: "Diane Blood's case has exposed the inadequacy of the law in this area. Cases of this kind are enormously complex. A single set of rigid rules will never be sufficient where no two cases are the same and technology is constantly changing."

The authority made its original decision without considering a range of submissions in support of Mrs Blood's case, including a statement from Baroness Warnock, who chaired the inquiry that preceded the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, that were aired during Mrs Blood's unsuccessful High Court application earlier this month.

Richard Stein, of the solicitors Leigh Day & Co, said no account had been taken of Mrs Blood's individual circumstances. "It was a blanket principle," he said."Why have 21 great and good people on the authority when all they are going to be doing is checking tickets?"

The letter was faxed to Mrs Blood's solicitors on Tuesday evening, just ahead of yesterday morning's Commons debate on the case, launched by Mr Ashton.

The timing enabled the junior health minister John Horam to have something to disclose to MPs - while warning the House against legislating to change the law "on the spur of the moment".

Mrs Blood's supporters said they were convinced that the outpourings of public sympathy and backing had convinced the authority that it was necessary to act.

Michael McMahon, Mrs Blood's father, said: "I think the support that the public has given to Diane has shown that their stance has been totally unjustified. They have a job to do but I don't believe they have done it very well."

Mr Ashton said the authority was now "backtracking", but there was still a "gaping hole" in the legislation. Exactly the same thing could happen to another couple in a car crash, he said.

There were concerns last night that all the authority was in fact doing was ensuring that it had, however belatedly, considered all relevant material in advance of a Court of Appeal hearing in the New Year. A spokeswoman said: "We are ensuring . . . that no stone is left unturned."