Last updated at 15:26 19 November 2007

Gordon Brown today angered family rights campaigners by refusing a free vote on changes to fertility laws.

Downing Street is insisting the Human Tissue and Embryology Bill be railroaded through Parliament by the whips - despite concerns from church leaders, pro-family groups and Labour MPs.

The legislation removes the requirement on fertility clinics to consider the father's rights before providing treatment.

It will also let lesbian couples receive IVF without involvement from the father beyond donating sperm.

Campaigners say the proposals are a matter of conscience and should be a free vote.

David Cameron has agreed Tory MPs can vote independently.

Mr Brown's official spokesman today insisted: "The position on the Embryology Bill is that this is a government Bill and will be treated as such."

Labour MP Geraldine Smith, whose Commons motion criticising the proposals has the support of 45 MPs, said she would defy the whip.

"The Government do need to take heed of the concerns being raised. There is no way I am going to vote for legislation that is nonsense," she said.

The motion tabled by Ms Smith says the proposed legislation is "profoundly misinformed" and "undermines the best interest of the child".

Labour signatories include former ministers John Battle and Keith Vaz and backbenchers Lindsay Hoyle and Rudi Vis. Opponents also include Anglican and Catholic church leaders.

Archbishop of York Dr John Sentanu was leading criticisms of the legislation in the Lords this afternoon.

He has regularly spoken out about the importance of fathers in avoiding a breakdown in family life and argued recently: "If we do not get a lot of role models from fathers, I don't think we're going to turn the tide."

He has also spoken out in favour of the traditional two-parent family, arguing: "The Government needs to undertake a policy reorientation that incorporates the benefits of marriage to society as a whole, rather than relegating it to just another lifestyle choice."

The campaign is being backed by MPs from all parties, led by former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith.

Do you think it's wrong to only use the term 'partner'? Join the debate in readers' comments below...

Writing in The Mail on Sunday, Mr Duncan Smith, who has undertaken pioneering research into the critical role that fathers play in keeping youngsters out of trouble, says the proposed new law is "another nail in the coffin of the traditional family and another blow against fatherhood".

He adds: "Just as we are beginning to appreciate the vital role fathers play in the successful upbringing of children, Labour Ministers are sending out the utterly wrong signal fathers don't matter."

Mr Duncan Smith and his allies say the measure is in line with covert moves by the Government to undermine traditional families by removing terms such as "marriage, father, mother, husband, wife and spouse" from the statute book - and even from official forms.

The new row has been provoked by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which introduces new regulations governing the creation of embryos outside the human body.

The most controversial provisions govern IVF treatment. The current duty on the part of clinics to take account of "the welfare of the child" when providing fertility treatment will be retained - but crucially, the reference to "the need for a father" will be removed.

It means lesbian couples can be regarded as joint legal parents of children conceived through the use of donated sperm, eggs or embryos.

In addition the new registration forms refer to "father or second parent".

In the case of lesbian couples, this would allow one woman to be registered as the "mother" and the second woman as "second parent" instead of the sperm donor father.

The Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, said: "The Bill proposes to remove the need for IVF providers to take into account the child's need for a father when considering an IVF application.

"This is profoundly wrong as it radically undermines the place of the father in a child's life and makes the natural rights of the child subordinate to the couple's desires."

The campaigners say a new poll commissioned by the charity Christian Action Research and Education shows nearly four out of five people think it is vital to consider a child's need for a father when processing lesbian applicants for IVF treatment.

The new law means that where sperm donor fathers are excluded by lesbian parents, children brought up by lesbian couples and who wish to contact their fathers will have to wait until they are 18 to exercise their legal right to establish their identity.

A number of Labour politicians have also spoken out against the reform. And 45 MPs have signed a Commons Motion tabled by Morecambe Labour MP Geraldine Smith, saying the proposals are "profoundly misinformed and clearly undermine the best interests of the child".

Campaigners claim the new law is the latest evidence of a secret drive to remove traditional family roles from the statute book.

A Mail on Sunday investigation established that in recent years, a number of measures have been pushed through quietly to achieve this.

In 2000, tax credit forms were changed requiring applicants to refer to their spouses as "partners" not husbands and wives. Tax and benefits forms now routinely refer to "partners" instead of husbands, wives or spouses.

And four years ago, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, then Equality Minister, was responsible for a Government report which said: "It is envisaged that Government forms currently asking for details of a person's 'marital status' would be altered to read 'civil status'."

Mr Duncan Smith said: "The Government has quietly expunged mention of marriage, spouse, husband and wife from official forms, so deleting the traditional family from the Whitehall mindset."

Ben Summerskill, chief executive of the gay and lesbian rights group Stonewall, said last night: "At a time when three million children in this country are growing up in singleparent households, it seems odd there should be this obsession with a few hundred who have the opportunity to have a second loving parent.

"This is simply extending the protection that already exist in respect of heterosexuals."

In 2000 Tony Blair pushed through legislation to repeal Section 28. But the move was opposed by religious groups and the Conservatives.

The passage of the 1967 Abortion Bill also led to furious Parliamentary debate. It legalised abortion on demand and remains the basis of the current legislation.