Juliet Tizzard

LM network resources Core elements: Institute of Ideas | Spiked | List of all pages on the network Key People: Frank Furedi, Michael Fitzpatrick, Claire Fox, Helene Guldberg, James Heartfield, Mick Hume, Phil Mullan, Brendan O'Neill, Keith Teare, James Woudhuysen, Publications: Living Marxism | LM Contents | LM Commentaries | Frank Furedi: List of Publications | Confrontation | The next step Precursors: Revolutionary Communist Tendency | Revolutionary Communist Party Companies: Junius Publications | Informinc (LM) Limited | Cyberia | Easynet | CScape | Academy of Ideas Background: Bibliography | Chronology | Images and logos | Scribd document archive

Juliet Tizzard in 2010

Juliet Tizzard is head of policy and communications at the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), a non-departmental Government body which, amongst other things, licenses and monitors all human embryo research being conducted in the UK. She is associated with the libertarian and anti-environmentalist LM network having been a columnist for Living Marxism. She has also written for Spiked, written for and appeared at various events for the Institute of Ideas , and contributed to a publication of the Pro-Choice Forum.

Current & Recent Roles

Since October 2013 Tizzard has been the Director of strategy and corporate affairs at the HFEA. She has also been head of policy and communications at HFEA since August 2011 and was head of policy from June 2008. According to Tizzard's linked in profile these roles have involved: developing the media relations and communications strategy, including digital and social media, developing evidence-based policy development in assisted reproduction; public consultations; horizon scanning; scientific and ethical advice; and stakeholder engagement. She is also chair the HFEA's Executive Licensing Panel which considers licence applications from clinics and laboratories. As head of Policy she was also involved in 'running public consultations and scientific horizon scanning; overseeing scientific and ethical advice to the Authority; leading stakeholder engagement; taking part in business planning and corporate strategy development'. Prior to this Tizzard was Deputy Head of Ethics at the British Medical Association (BMA), where she was responsible for 'policy and ethics advice and lobbying on assisted reproduction, abortion and organ donation'.

Background

Tizzard studied at at the University of Sheffield (1991 – 1994), achieving a BA in English Literature. This was followed with study at Kings College London, where she gained an MA in Medical Ethics and Law (1996 – 1998). Following this Tizzard became director of the Progress Educational Trust where she started as the Administrator in April 1998. The Trust was established to promote the benefits of reproductive and genetic science and 'believes that reproductive and genetic technologies have much to offer'. At the Progress Educational Trust, Tizzard established, and was editor-in-chief of, BioNews - the Progress Educational Trust's free weekly digest of news. This has been sponsored variously by SmithKline Beecham (in 1999-2000) and AstraZeneca and covers topics such as IVF, cloning, embryo research, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), gene therapy and prenatal genetic diagnosis. She remained as the Director of PET until August 2004, at which point her linkedin profile indicates she had a 3 year gap in employment, and she did not write another article for BioNews again until 2014.

LM links

Between 1998-2000 Tizzard wrote 3 articles for Living Marxism and LM magazine, linking her to the LM network.The LM network argued in 1994 'for interfering with nature at every opportunity in order to improve the human condition' via infertility treatment and genetic engineering. LM's science editor John Gillott worked for the Genetic Interest Group which worked closely with PROGRESS and both Gillott and Tizzard have been on the staff of the online clinical genetics resource Genepool. As well as contributing articles to LM, Tizzard has also contributed to the LM network's later fronts: Spiked, and the Institute of Ideas (IoI). She also wrote a chapter for the IoI publication, Designer Babies: Where Should We Draw The Line?

Against Nature (1997)

Prior to joining the Progress Educational Trust, Tizzard had also appeared in the Channel 4 TV series Against Nature (1997), which represented environmentalists as Nazis responsible for death and deprivation in the Third World, and argued that germline gene therapy and human cloning will liberate humanity from nature. Subsequent investigations revealed that certain programme makers and several key contributors to the series, including Tizzard, had been closely involved with a magazine called LM and the LM network. The links included featuring leading members of the network, such as Frank Furedi, John Gillott and Tizzard in the programme. In addition the assistant director Eve Kay-Kreizman (also known as Eve Kay and as Eve Anderson) was involved with the RCP as one of the principal coordinators and is married to James Heartfield, who helped write the RCP's manifesto.

Views

Media Presence (1995-2015)

Tizzard appears 36 times in a Nexis search of media presence, with her earliest appearance in 1995. She has been quoted alongside others with links to the network such as Alastair Kent and John Gillott of Genetic Interest Group. The main subject area she is referenced on relates to genetic screening, particularly surrounding the issue of 'saviour siblings', followed by issues surrounding fertility, egg and sperm donations and stem cell research. She frequently speaks against regulation, arguing that people should be allowed to make whatever re-productive choice they feel is right. Regulation that is passed or upheld is often portrayed by Tizzard as the result of extremist lobby-groups such as pro-life groups, or compared with an emotive scenario in an effort simplify the ethical debate to a 'black and white' decision. This position can serve to obscure the complex debate surrounding the potential use of such technology for screening for 'disabilty' and how society's negative social construction of disability could lead to regulation (and pro-creational choices) favouring screening against all forms of perceived disability. Moreover, it ignores the distortions that could be introduced as a result of de-regulation which could led to subsequent commmercialisation of technologies, whether through the public or private spheres.

Anti-Precautionary Principle

Tizzard also appears to reject the need to consider what influence regulation of a new technology may have on people's future reproductive choices, basing her argument on current norms, which seems to allign to the network's rejection of the precautionary principle. For example, when considering 'preimplantation':

Only women who know that they already have breast cancer - or any other serious genetic disorder - in their family have shown interest in preimplantation diagnosis. They may have seen female relatives suffer or die from the disease and may face the prospect of developing it themselves. Such women make the decision whether to opt for preimplantation diagnosis or not by balancing up two considerations: the desire for a child and the wish that it is free from a disease that has devastated their family. This is a good treatment for women who know they are at risk of having a child with an inherited genetic disorder. Cries of eugenics from the anti-abortion lobby will only limit its availability for those who could benefit from it

Anti-regulation

In a letter correspondence to the Guardian relating to embryo screening, Tizzard argues that new techniques are being stifled by regulation, that the ethical debates are ahead of the science and questions whether anyone has used embryo screening frivolously in the ten years it has been used. However, such an argument appears to ignore that existing regulation controls current use, so a lack of frivolous use in and of itself is not necessarily an argument for de-regulation:

Ethics and regulation are not lagging behind genetic science. They're very much ahead of the game. You imply that the technique is another step towards designer babies. But you don't explain what this mythical 'designer baby' is or how pre-implantation screening takes us one step closer to creating it. Embryo screening has been with us for nearly a decade: can you point to anyone who has used it frivolously? The process is already subject to strict controls. Now the HFEA is considering whether to control it further by restricting availability. But I don't believe they should decide who gets PGD and who doesn't. We are all quite responsible enough to make our own reproductive decisions. The trouble starts not when we have reproductive choice, but when politicians and regulators stop trusting us to exercise it responsibly. Yours, Juliet Tizzard

Writing for LM (1998-2000)

Tizzard wrote two articles for LM between 1998-2000, writing on reproductive treatments and technologies such as IVF and cloning. The arguments Tizzard uses are often used by other members of the network, for example:

Anti-moralism and Regulation

Writing for LM Tizzard argues that regulation of IVF treatment which seeks to consider the child’s future welfare actually leads to a moral investigation of parents and an intrusion of the state into decisions which should be private and personal:

The law dictates that doctors must take account of the welfare of the future child before beginning IVF treatment. Since no child exists at the time of the first consultation with the doctor, assessing the 'welfare of the child' really amounts to scrutinising the would-be parents to see whether a child in their care would be properly looked after. The law's declared aim of looking out for the interests of children may appear an admirable one. But the consequence of the legislation is to legitimise the moral inspection of patients' lives

Society is anti-technology

Tizzard also argues that the proposed regulation of IVF treatment represents a trend in society which sees technology as something negative and that the idea that nature can be tamed should be championed not maligned:

The bizarre idea that medical technology should only be used to restore natural processes flies in the face of reality. Particularly in reproductive technology, the trend in the second half of the twentieth century has been not to mirror nature, but to override it. New contraceptive devices and abortion techniques were welcomed by women as methods for avoiding precisely what nature would otherwise impose upon them. Here, nature was considered something to be conquered at all costs, not something to be respected. Now this positive attitude to technology is becoming less widespread, with worrying consequences for those at the giving and receiving end of fertility treatment

Managing Risk

Similarly in an LM Commentary Tizzard seeks to downplay the risk of cloning whilst assuming it will almost inevitably be beneficial:

Someone… will succeed with human cloning. But is this something we should worry about? Cloning is unlikely to do the world much harm. Far from damaging mankind, it has the potential to positively help it. The Roslin Institute, where Dolly was born, plans to use nuclear transfer technology to produce animals with human genes, like the recently announcement about Polly the sheep. Such animals can be used to produce medicines for human use, such as blood clotting agents for haemophiliacs. Other research possibilities include creating cloned human embryos and culturing cells from them that can be used to treat diseases such as Parkinson's in adults

Anti-Science and the precautionary principle

Tizzard again concludes that any rejection of cloning, or resistance to it from society, is indicative of a society that is irrational and anti-science, whilst assuming cloning will surely be an overall benefit to humanity:

The irrational discussion around cloning leaves the impression that science in general, and reproductive biology in particular, brings us nothing but trouble and strife. Meanwhile, the idea that science can benefit mankind by treating, or even preventing, disease is smothered by the hysteria.

Similarly, in an event for the Pro-Choice Forum held at Kent University in 1997, Tizzard questions the application of the precautionary principle in fertility treatment decisions involving the welfare of the child:

Is there a difference between assessing the welfare of an existing human being and assessing the welfare of something that does not even exist? You could say it is the same, but I think it throws up some problems. It requires contemplating a future scenario that may never arrive.

Writing for BioNews (1999-Present)

Word cloud using list of titles to articles published by Juliet Tizzard for BioNews, created on the wordle website, 4 March 2015.

As of March 2015 Tizzard has written over 200 articles for BioNews. This includes 19 on 'cloning', 16 on 'embryo' research, 15 on 'IVF', 14 on 'stem cell' research, and 11 on 'genes' and 'genetics', amongst others.

Cloning

Prior to her role as head of the HFEA Tizzard wrote a number of articles for BioNews on the merits of cloning and defending the technique from 'media hostility' which she argues has held up research in the area due to an unrealistic 'slippery slope' argument:

The idea that because something can happen, it will inevitably happen seems, on the face of it, to be perfectly obvious. But why? Just because we can do something, does that necessarily mean that we are going to do it? Of course not. There are a whole range of awful things that human beings could do to one another, but they usually take the decision not to carry them out. The advent of something which might make performing horrific acts more easy does not necessarily lead to our doing so. Indeed, it might remind us that such a thing is possible and make us more determined not to proceed down that road. In the context of human cloning, it could be argued that all the talk of the horrors of cloned babies has made society more resolute in its opposition it.

In a later article she seems to turn the slippery slope argument on its head with the reverse expectation that cloning will one day be useful and that the only obstacle to such an outcome is an ethical debate:

So reproductive cloning in humans is not safe. But will it always be that way? And if one day it does become safe enough to try in humans, will president Bush be more sympathetic? Probably not. Safety matters enormously - especially for prospective patients - but ultimately it won't win or lose the political battle. Only an open and honest debate on the rights and wrongs of bringing cloned babies into the world will suffice.

However, similarly to the tactics used in the 'Against Nature' programme broadcast on Channel 4 where environmentalist were presented as extremists, Tizzard argues most who question the creation of cloned human embryos are anti-abortion activists. Moreover she implies the majority view on cloning is being suppressed by a moralist minority, a similar line is also frequently used by other members of the network:

It seems that as more and more respected institutions come out in favour of creating cloned human embryos for research and therapy, those opposed to cloning for this purpose (most of whom are anti-abortion activists) shout ever louder. But such commentators, instead of engaging in rational debate on the issues (a debate which is vitally important), seem to be utilising tactics which are designed to hoodwink the public.

GM and Anti-Science

Tizzard suggests attitudes towards genetic research in humans may be negatively influenced by negative attitudes towards GM food, which she believes is somehow promoted in society. According to Tizzard:

'the continued attacks on genetics in agriculture and - more worryingly - the promotion of negative attitudes even towards research may start to have their impact on applications of genetics in human medicine.'

Spin

Tizzard also appears to regard 'spin' as a valid way of overcoming public concerns:

Three cheers for PPL Therapeutics! Not for their success in cloning pigs (although this is worth at least three cheers), but for their success with the media coverage of those five little piggies. Press coverage in the United Kingdom of the cloned pigs was almost universally positive... Perhaps PPL Therapeutics is just good at media spin. But maybe media spin isn't such a bad thing in science... those who raise concerns about science - whether environmental groups worried about GM crops, or church leaders worried about genetic testing - seem to have no lack of confidence about their own position. In fact, their approach to media relations often reeks of astounding arrogance. So, perhaps instead of spin doctors, what we need is spin scientists!'

Career Chronology

• 24-25 November 1997 - European Commission, workshop participant
• 1998 - 2000 - Living Marxism/LM, Writer/Contributor
• June 1998 - August 2004 - Progress Educational Trust, Director.
• 1999 - Founds BioNews, the Progress Educational Trust's weekly digest.
• March 1999 - 2004. - BioNews, Writer/Contributor.
• 13 March 2004 - Culture Wars, Speaker.
• March 2007 - July 2007 - Trustee for Progress Educational Trust
• November 2007 - May 2008 - British Medical Association, Deputy Head of Ethics.
• June 2008 - August 2011 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), Head of Policy.
• 12 July 2009 - Spiked, Writer/Contributor.
• August 2011 - Present - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Head of policy and Communications.
• 1 July 2012 - European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), Speaker.
• October 2013 - Present - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Director of Strategy and Corporate Affairs.

Other Affiliations

• Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Lay member of the ethics committee.
• One at a time.
• Lifecycle.

Educational Background

• 1991 - 1994 - University of Sheffield, BA in English Literature
• 1996 - 1998 - King's College London, MA in Medical Ethics and Law

Other Links to the Network

LM Network Panel Appearances

1997

• Autumn Term 1997 - Juliet Tizzard appeared on a panel with: Professor Naomi Pfeffer (London Metropolitan University, has written for BioNews) & Laurence Shaw (Consultant gynaecologist practicing in Kent and central London, associate director of the London Bridge Fertility, Gynaecology and Genetics Centre), organised by Ellie Lee at Kent University.

2003

• 27 April 2003 - Juliet Tizzard appeared on a panel with: Frank Furedi (perhaps the leading associate, of the LM network), David Gollancz (Lawyer), Dr Jacqueline Laing (Senior Lecturer in Law, London Metropolitan University, and Tiffany Jenkins (has written for Living Marxism and Spiked is director of the arts and society programme at the Institute of Ideas), discussing 'Genes and Identity - Genetic Inheritance and Psychological Welfare' for the Institute of Ideas at the 'Genes and Society Festival', sponsored by Pfizer and supported by BAC

2008

• 21 October 2008 - Juliet Tizzard presented a discussion entitled: 'IVF provision, risk and morality', to the Parents Forum, for the Institute of Ideas.

2010

• 24 November 2010 - Juliet Tizzard presented to PET's annual conference alongside: Professor Lorraine Culley, Natalie Gamble, Zeynep Gürtin-Broadbent, Stuart Lavery, James Lawford-Davies, Professor Naomi Pfeffer, Professor Janet Radcliffe Richards, Dr Françoise Shenfield, Dr Evan Harris, Dr Allan Pacey, Lord Naren Patel, an d Professor Sally Sheldon, discussing 'Passport to Parenthood: The Evidence and Ethics Behind Cross-Border Reproductive Care', at the University of London's Institute of Child Health.

Publications

1997

• Juliet Tizzard, Naomi Pfeffer & Laurence Shaw, 'Reproductive technologies: Ethics and infertility treatment: should we have the 'right to reproduce' 1997, Kent University, Pro-Choice Forum.

1998

• Juliet Tizzard, 'IVF for OAPs?', LM 109, p. 29, April 1998.
• Juliet Tizzard, 'Human clones to order?' - Juliet Tizzard argues that research into cloning humans could benefit us all, LM Commentary, 1 September 1998.

1999

• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Embryo mix’, Bionews, 5 April 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Who wants a millennium baby anyway?’, Bionews, 12 April 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Who cares about the 'gay gene'?’, Bionews, 26 April 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Is human cloning unsafe or unethical?’, Bionews, 3 May 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Scientists need public support for cloned tissue therapies’, Bionews, 10 May 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘PGD doesn't imply that sufferers don't count’, Bionews, 17 May 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Why the US government should fund all embryo research’, Bionews, 24 May 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Is surrogacy really so bad?’, Bionews, 31 May 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The strange world of IVF regulation’, Bionews, 7 June 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Ovarian tissue promises’, Bionews, 14 June 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Slippery slopes and cloning’, Bionews, 21 June 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What's wrong with selecting embryos?’, Bionews, 12 July 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Squeamish about babies from beyond the grave’, Bionews, 19 July 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Do we have a right to know our genetic parents?’, Bionews, 26 July 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Insurers in trouble over gene tests’, Bionews, 2 August 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The HFEA should stick to its guns on egg sharing’, Bionews, 9 August 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Embryo screening for late onset cancer is not frivolous’, Bionews, 16 August 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘More silly talk of men having babies’, Bionews, 13 September 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Industry should stand up for science too’, Bionews, 20 September 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Banning treatment for older women needs justifying’, Bionews, 27 September 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A tragic death that should not deter gene therapy researchers’, Bionews, 4 October 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Sperm wars?’, Bionews, 11 October 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A breath of fresh air from the BMA’, Bionews, 18 October 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Eggs for sale’, Bionews, 25 October 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘More science on xenotransplantation is needed’, Bionews, 1 November 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Multiple births may not have a simple solution’, Bionews, 8 November 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Winning the stem cell argument’, Bionews, 15 November 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What is a designer baby?’, Bionews, 22 November 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Pessimism in assisted reproduction’, Bionews, 29 November 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Is Britain really so anti science’, Bionews, 6 December 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Is surrogacy becoming normal?’, Bionews, 13 December 1999.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The trouble with freezing’, Bionews, 20 December 1999.

2000

• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The folly of predicting the future’, Bionews, 10 January 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Will breast always be best?’, Bionews, 17 January 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘When medicine meets law’, Bionews, 25 January 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What's so wrong with egg freezing for 'career women'?’, Bionews, 31 January 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Regulating gene therapy’, Bionews, 7 February 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Ethical worries and medical databases’, Bionews, 14 February 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Human rights meet parental rights’, Bionews, 21 February 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard Blair's 'U-turn' on GM food could be bad news for human genetics BioNews, 28 February 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘We must open the door to all kinds of stem cell research’, Bionews, 6 March 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, 'Embryonic developments', LM 128, p. 17, March 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Why shouldn't scientists indulge in media spin?’, Bionews, 20 March 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘We need more egg and sperm donors’, Bionews, 27 March 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers’, Bionews, 3 April 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Cloning research should not be dictated by moral minorities’, Bionews, 10 April 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘DI offspring may never be satisfied’, Bionews, 25 April 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The real issue behind egg fusion techniques’, Bionews, 2 May 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘When adults fight over children’, Bionews, 8 May 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A princely embarrassment’, Bionews, 22 May 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Chinese whispers in cloning’, Bionews, 30 May 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Who is fit to be a parent?’, Bionews, 5 June 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The dangers of over hyping’, Bionews, 12 June 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genome fallout’, Bionews, 3 July 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘No surprise that gay couples go abroad for IVF’, Bionews, 24 July 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, 'The Future of Human Reproduction: Ethics, Choice and Regulation (Book Review)', Journal of Medical Ethics, 1 August 2000, Vol 26(4), pp. 294-295.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Embryo stem cell therapies: the case for’, Bionews, 7 August 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Donating eggs the American way’, Bionews, 14 August 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘All those in favour of embryo stem cell research say 'aye'’, Bionews, 21 August 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘New law on posthumous fathers will not mean another Diane Blood case’, Bionews, 29 August 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Secrets and lies in sperm donation’, Bionews, 4 September 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Britain is no 'pariah state' on cloning’, Bionews, 18 September 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Frozen embryo mix’, Bionews, 25 September 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘On nappies', Bionews, 2 October 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘On hard and fast rules in sex selection’, Bionews, 23 October 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘GDesigner babies and assuming the worst’, Bionews, 30 October 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Embryo stem cell politics’, Bionews, 6 November 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Gene patenting in the news’, Bionews, 13 November 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Triplet mother is not ungrateful, Bionews, 20 November 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genes and the public’, Bionews, 27 November 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Misconceptions in assisted conception debate’, Bionews, 4 December 2000.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Parliament and the future of embryo research’, Bionews, 18 December 2000.

2001

• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What rights do people born of donor conception have?’, Bionews, 8 January 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Monkeys and slippery slopes’, Bionews, 15 January 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘No time to delay stem cell research’, Bionews, 22 January 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What's wrong with postmenopausal motherhood?’, Bionews, 29 January 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A quiet revolution in IVF?’, Bionews, 5 February 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Size doesn't matter’, Bionews, 12 February 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘On unnoticed Holy Grails’, Bionews, 26 February 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Banking on the future’, Bionews, 5 March 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Reproductive cloning isn't safe’, Bionews, 12 March 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Medical research and the media’, Bionews, 19 March 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘One hundred issues old and counting’, Bionews, 26 March 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Matters of safety in human cloning’, Bionews, 2 April 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genes and insurance debate hots up’, Bionews, 9 April 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Time to be positive about genetics’, Bionews, 17 April 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The genetics slow burn’, Bionews, 23 April 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Does legal fatherhood matter?’, Bionews, 30 April 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Three parents and a baby?’, Bionews, 8 May 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The politics of stem cells’, Bionews, 14 May 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘BioNews election pledges’, Bionews, 21 May 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘New', Bionews, 29 May 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Biomedical science and the general election’, Bionews, 4 June 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Why talk of designer babies is harmful, Bionews, 11 June 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should IVF be restricted to married women?’, Bionews, 18 June 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Salomone case is not the tip of the iceberg’, Bionews, 25 June 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Special ESHRE conference issue’, Bionews, 9 July 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Double standards on cloning democratic process’, Bionews, 6 August 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What they said about cloning and stem cells’, Bionews, 13 August 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Opposites attract on the surrogacy issue’, Bionews, 20 August 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Rational debate on 'incest' IVF needed’, Bionews, 28 August 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The past and future of regulation of biomedicine’, Bionews, 10 September 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A right to two parents?’, Bionews, 17 September 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Gutter press on surrogacy’, Bionews, 24 September 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A technique that promotes welfare for all’, Bionews, 1 October 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Is a moratorium enough?’, Bionews, 29 October 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Time to reconsider sex selection?’, Bionews, 5 November 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘European Parliament threatens embryo stem cell research’, Bionews, 12 November 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘No need to panic over cloning ruling’, Bionews, 19 November 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Does therapeutic cloning need regulation?’, Bionews, 26 November 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should HIV positive people get IVF?’, Bionews, 3 December 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The royal media circus’, Bionews, 10 December 2001.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Is a tissue’, Bionews, 17 December 2001.

2002

• Juliet Tizzard, in Ellie Lee (Ed.)Designer Babies: Where Should We Draw The Line?, Institute of Ideas/Hodder Arnold, 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The most famous sheep in the world’, Bionews, 7 January 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A genetics challenge for doctors and patients alike’, Bionews, 14 January 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Legal battles on cloning aren't what really count’, Bionews, 21 January 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Ovary banking for career women?’, Bionews, 28 January 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Great expectations’, Bionews, 4 February 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘IVF and cerebral palsy: don't panic’, Bionews, 11 February 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Taking carbon kitty too seriously?’, Bionews, 18 February 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘IVF licence fees could hit patients’, Bionews, 8 July 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Embryo mix’, Bionews, 15 July 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Do we need protecting from over the counter genetic tests?’, Bionews, 22 July 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Will donor anonymity be a thing of the past?’, Bionews, 29 July 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Why is PGD for tissue typing only not allowed?’, Bionews, 5 August 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should PGD be considered case by case?’, Bionews, 12 August 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Ignoring the biological clock’, Bionews, 19 August 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Frozen embryo battles’, Bionews, 27 August 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Misunderstanding IVF patients’, Bionews, 2 September 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Screening embryos for chromosomal abnormalities’, Bionews, 9 September 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Women only clinic might not be best for everyone’, Bionews, 16 September 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should the UN be pronouncing on cloning?’, Bionews, 30 September 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genes and behaviour: getting the message across’, Bionews, 7 October 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Serving the Bridget Jones generation?’, Bionews, 14 October 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Regulating sperm sorting’, Bionews, 21 October 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘On the making of a media story’, Bionews, 28 October 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘IVF mix’, Bionews, 4 November 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Debating genetic susceptibility tests’, Bionews, 11 November 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Understanding postmenopausal conceptions’, Bionews, 18 November 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘News from the strange world of Antinori’, Bionews, 2 December 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘House of Lords debate adds little to the stem cell discussion’, Bionews, 9 December 2002.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Good and bad news in IVF’, Bionews, 16 December 2002.

2003

• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Clones going underground’, Bionews, 13 January 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should parents be able to choose the sex of their baby?’, Bionews, 20 January 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Principle and pragmatism in donor conception’, Bionews, 27 January 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Do we need to be perfect parents?’, Bionews, 3 February 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Regulating DIY genetic tests’, Bionews, 10 February 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Did cloning kill Dolly?’, Bionews, 17 February 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The courtroom and the clinic’, Bionews, 24 February 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Who's the daddy?’, Bionews, 3 March 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The truth about selective termination’, Bionews, 10 March 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Never mind the law on cloning’, Bionews, 17 March 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘BioNews: bigger and better’, Bionews, 24 March 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Banking on Biobank’, Bionews, 31 March 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Debating stem cells in Brussels’, Bionews, 7 April 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A tissue’, Bionews, 14 April 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Gene hype?’, Bionews, 22 April 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should HIV positive people become parents?’, Bionews, 28 April 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Screening for cystic fibrosis’, Bionews, 6 May 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Lack of IVF on the NHS is driving the success of egg sharing’, Bionews, 12 May 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Will the Hashmi ruling mean a free’, Bionews, 19 May 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The end of genetic discrimination in the US?’, Bionews, 27 May 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Do women just want handsome men for their sperm?’, Bionews, 2 June 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Confusion over cloning’, Bionews, 10 June 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Parental choice and child welfare’, Bionews, 17 June 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Ethics and safety in the 'saviour child' debate’, Bionews, 23 June 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Restrictive laws in Europe are harming patients’, Bionews, 7 July 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘IVF: much to celebrate’, Bionews, 28 July 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Announcing BioNews.org.uk’, Bionews, 4 August 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘IVF on the NHS?’, Bionews, 11 August 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genetic profiling at birth: a storm in a teacup?’, Bionews, 18 August 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Time to review 'saviour siblings' law?’, Bionews, 1 September 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Antenatal screening for Fragile X: time to proceed?’, Bionews, 8 September 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should IVF doctors inform patients of all potential risks?’, Bionews, 15 September 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Posthumous fathers and the law’, Bionews, 22 September 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘No legal solution to personal conflict’, Bionews, 1 October 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Do ovary transplants allow us to cheat nature?’, Bionews, 13 October 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Reporters should put new research in context’, Bionews, 20 October 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Do the UK embryology laws need updating?’, Bionews, 27 October 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Chosen children: better or worse off?’, Bionews, 3 November 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Should we have new laws to stop sex selection?’, Bionews, 12 November 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The politics of stem cells in Europe’, Bionews, 20 November 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘The ethics of 'egg giving'’, Bionews, 4 December 2003.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Dangerous laws that compromise patient safety’, Bionews, 16 December 2003.

2004

• Juliet Tizzard, 'Sex Selection, Child Welfare and Risk: A Critique of the HFEA's Recommendations on Sex Selection', Healthcare Analysis, March 2004, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp. 61-68 (Subscription required).
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Embryo splitting: a useful procedure in humans?’, Bionews, 19 January 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘'Surrogran' commentators wrongly assume the worst’, Bionews, 2 February 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Stem cell hype?’, Bionews, 16 February 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Time to debate reproductive cloning?’, Bionews, 23 February 2004.
• Angus Dawson, Derek Morgan, Søren Holm, Mairi Levitt, Helen Watt, and Juliet Tizzard, 'Regulation and Reproduction', Health care analysis, March 2004, Vol 12(1), pp. 1-68.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Stem cells and politics in the United States’, Bionews, 8 March 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘'Saviour siblings' debate down under’, Bionews, 15 March 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Happy birthday BioNews’, Bionews, 22 March 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Wise words from across the pond?’, Bionews, 5 April 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘HFEA comes under pressure on 'saviour siblings'’, Bionews, 13 April 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘How much regulation of assisted reproduction is needed?’, Bionews, 19 April 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genetics, Bionews, 5 May 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Public support is dependent upon health benefits’, Bionews, 10 May 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Genetic profiling of babies is not coming soon’, Bionews, 17 May 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Menopause test is good news for women’, Bionews, 21 June 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘When the law protects embryos but harms patients’, Bionews, 13 July 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Time to resolve the 'saviour siblings' issue’, Bionews, 20 July 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Saviour siblings: have we slipped down the slope?’, Bionews, 26 July 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘What they said about Francis Crick’, Bionews, 2 August 2004.
• Juliet Tizzard, ‘A farewell’, Bionews, 9 August 2004.

2008

• Danielle Hamm, Caroline Harrison, Rebecca Mussell, Julian Sheather, Ann Sommerville, and Juliet Tizzard, 'Ethics Briefings', Journal of medical Ethics, 1 September 2008, Vol. 34(9), pp. 701-702.
• Danielle Hamm & Juliet Tizzard, 'Presumed consent for organ donation', BMJ Clinical research ed, 2008, Vol.336 (7638), pp.230, (Subscription required).

2009

• Juliet Tizzard 'My Sister's Keeper', Spiked website. Friday 17 July 2009.

2014

• Juliet Tizzard, ‘Mistakes happen, but the picture is mostly positive', Bionews, 21 July 2014.

Resources

LinkedIn Juliet Tizzard