A detail report was issued by the committee under the leadership of Mary Warnock in 1984. This report addressed guidelines on how we should treat reproductive technologis, such as artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, surrogacy and so on. The most important of them are two; one to permit some experimentation on embryos up to two weeks, the other to forbid professional or administrative assistance, whether commercial or non-commercial, for surrogate mothering. These guidelines have been strongly criticized by various people. Especially, R. M. Hare criticizes the report of not giving cogent reasons for them. From point of view of intutionism the committee adopts, however, it is natural that we should be unable to do so. The report is willing to tolerate infertility by which the psychological distress may be caused in a couple. Because infertility, that is, an inability to have children is considered as a malfunction. Reproductive technologies which apply to the treatment of infertility are artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization and so on, but not surrogacy or cloning. Why is the latter forbidden as the treatment of infertility, the former being permitted? What is the difference? The Warnock Comittee report wil come to be little help to us as rapid progress of technologies. What is wrong with this report? The present paper is intented to explain some points.