missing the point

Or maybe not: I have not done a survey, but the media report seem to omit the point made by opponents of the HFEA ruling, that children will die during this procedure. Here Il Scotsmano:

THE creation of "designer babies" to cure sick siblings will be allowed, after the rules on embryo screening were relaxed in a landmark ruling yesterday by the United Kingdom's fertility watchdog.

[...]

However, the change sparked a backlash from pro- life groups, who warned of a "rush down a very slippery slope." Some feared the relaxing of regulations could lead to parents choosing the sex, hair colour or other such features of a child.

Well, the SPUC comment in fact said:

We have every sympathy for Joshua and his family. However, it cannot be right to create a child with the primary purpose of benefiting an elder brother. The designer baby may be allowed his or her right to live, but that same right will be denied to his embryonic brothers and sisters. These unwanted embryonic siblings could be flushed down the sink, frozen or used for experiments. Although one should do everything that is ethical to relieve illness and pain, it cannot be right to destroy human life like this. This unethical procedure undermines any benefit which could come from it.

The recent pictures of a baby dancing in the womb can be seen here.