Dr. James Nyikal

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 201 to 210 of 3161.

• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I beg to move: view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I beg to move: THAT view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I beg to move: THAT view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I beg to move: view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, I beg to move: view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: THAT, Clause 22 of the Bill be amended by deleting the words “a medical doctor” and substituting therefor the words “an assisted reproductive technology expert”. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: In this area, some people who are not registered as doctors may acquire qualifications and expertise that may get them involved in these issues. So, if you then restrict it to a medical doctor, you rule those people out yet they would be necessary. That is the essence of that amendment. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: There are two issues that are being discussed. One, is the person doing it, and two, the person who is being done on. Maybe, my first explanation was not very clear. It is about the certification by a medical doctor that the person who requires assisted reproductive technology does require it on medical grounds and no other grounds. If the proposer of the Bill is happy, as the Committee, we leave it as it is. We withdraw that amendment. view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairlady, when we went through Clause 22, on which Hon. Wamalwa was very clear, it did not bring out the issue of being single or not. It was basically about how a person undergoing assisted reproductive technology had to be certified by a medical doctor. That is what we passed. If we agree to this amendment, even if the person who requires the assisted reproductive technology is certified by a medical doctor, they will not get it if they are single. That is not a restriction that we need in law. I oppose the amendment. The electronic ... view
• 17 Nov 2021 in National Assembly: Hon. Deputy Chairlady, this is a very important amendment that is being proposed. I would propose that we also do not take it together as (ca) and (cb) because they have distinct differences. With (ca), the issue is that there must also be consent on when the next person would be requesting. The next person who may be requesting may not want that particular embryo and so, that consent is also important, but we can leave that to regulations in which case, I can support. The (cb) is more technical because even if you store the embryo, with time, they ... view