David Cameron risked putting his credentials as a modernising politician at risk by voting against a measure that makes it easier for lesbian couples to receive IVF treatment.

The Tory leader chose to side with the Right of his party because the issue of absent fathers goes to the heart of his message that Britain’s society is broken.

While some accuse Mr Cameron of delivering a sop to the section of the party least in tune with his leadership, he has always placed a strong emphasis on the family. He shares with Iain Duncan Smith, one of his predecessors, the conviction that the breakdown of the traditional family unit is a big factor in many social problems.

When it came to making a choice between asserting the value of fatherhood and supporting equal access to services regardless of sexual orientation, it was a straightforward choice.

His position was supported by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, who told The Times: “I think it strange that the Government should want to take away not just the need for a father but the right for a father.”

The consequence of the erosion of this was a loss of respect for the place of the family, he said. “Anything by way of legislation, while it must protect people’s rights, must also have regard for the wider issues of what is for the good of society as a whole.”

In the Commons yesterday Mr Duncan Smith said that removing the stipulation would amount to telling couples seeking fertility treatment that “fathers are not important, or are less important than mothers”.

While it might cause lesbian couples unease it was not discriminatory, he said. He was backed by a number of Labour MPs: one, David Taylor, said it was perverse to write the father out of the script. Another, Geraldine Smith, said: “We are not insisting that any single woman or lesbians do not have IVF treatment; the only thing we are saying is that there should be some father figure somewhere – it may be a grandfather, it may be a relative.”

Mark Simmonds, the Shadow Health Minister, said that it was “odd and inconsistent, incompatible and paradoxical” that ministers promoted the importance of fathers through policies but wanted to eliminate the need for a father to be considered before IVF.

But Dawn Primarolo, the Health Minister, said that it amounted to a practical impediment to lesbian couples seeking fertility treatment and that it was right to replace it with the need for supportive parenting.

It was “wholly inappropriate” to retain the “additional discriminatory burden” following the decisions to allow civil partnerships and adoption by gay couples.

The legislation was “fair, it offers equitable access and it recognises the complexities of the Britain we live in today,” she added. “What counts is the quality of parenting.”

Although officially a free vote, the Tory leadership was strongly encouraging its MPs to vote for amendments tabled by Mr Duncan Smith and Mr Simmonds that would have restored the need to take account of the role of fathers.

Hopes that sufficient numbers of Labour and other MPs would back the amendments proved forlorn. In the event both were defeated by sizeable majorities.

Applauding efforts by MPs – also supported by Mr Cameron – to lower the abortion limit, Cardinal Mur-phy-O’Connor said he welcomed even incremental change as a step in the right direction and appealed to British society to change its mind on abortion. He said that there was no doubt there had been a change in the national mood regarding termination.

Individual rights should not be put before the good of wider society as a whole, he said.

The Cardinal, who earlier this year wrote to the Prime Minister arguing that the Bill was so important that MPs should be given a free vote, continued: “It is perfectly licit for politicians who may be totally against all abortion to work for incremental change.”

But he said his concern was not so much with politics as with the whole of society.

He said that the emphasis should be on helping women with unwanted pregnancies to cope with the practical and emotional complications so they could carry their babies to term, and he predicted that the issue would not go away.

“I am quite sure it will come up again as people will see perhaps more clearly the sacredness of life.”

Lesbian couple’s tale

When Emma Miller and her partner Melanie Snee celebrated the first birthday of their quadruplets, they could not have been happier. Now the lesbian pair hope that other same-sex couples will be afforded the same opportunity for parenthood (Helen Nugent writes).

Ms Miller told The Times: “It would be a real shame if other couples didn’t get the chance to be parents.” The two women, from Co Durham, have been together for more than a decade and in their quest for a family turned to fertility treatment using a sperm donor.

“At the end of the day, it doesn’t make any difference whether you are male or female as long as you are a positive role model for your kids and there are positive role models within their families. And our families are incredibly supportive,” Ms Miller said.

The couple, both customer service advisers, decided it would be Ms Miller, 31, who would carry the babies as Ms Snee, 34, was studying at the time. She gave birth to Markus, Lucas, Harrison and Lara at 32 weeks, in 2006. Markus developed a respiratory condition but made a full recovery.

Ms Miller said: “When we brought them all home for the first time, for me, that was the most special moment.” Ms Snee added: “It was a wonderful moment for us both.”

Times Recommends

• Scots may get more tax-raising powers
• Why team games may make your children fat
• Ivy League targets Britain’s top students