In vitro fertilization: techniques and clinical applications

in Vitro Fertilization: A Question of Ethical and Spiritual Morality

In vitro fertilization is a common reproductive procedure that generally falls under the scope of biotechnology.

It is a process that is condemned by the Catholic church and often criticized by lawyers and ethicist despite the number of live births that result from the procedure

Despite this condemnation, there are hundreds of thousands of individuals that partake in IVF procedures every year, in the hope of bringing 'new life' into the world. Even members of spiritual communities have gone against tradition and the recommendation of church elders to participate in IVF. The increase in use and potential for abuse is alarming.

I will argue in this paper that in vitro fertilization is morally wrong because it results in the meaningless reproduction and may potentially result in the misuse or abuse of life and even death. I will support this thesis by arguing that in vitro fertilization allows man to overstep his authority over creation, that is opens the door to temptation and morally objectionable practices, and that it increases the potential for needless destruction of life.

Man and Authority

The process of in vitro fertilization allows man to overstep his authority over creation. The gift of life should be one that God gives, one that is sacred and spiritual in nature and one that does not involve the hand of man. This is the law of divine nature. Man was not originally created from technical processes in the past, nor should he be crated from technical or artificial means in the future. Doing so deprives man of the spirituality and wholeness of the process that is creation, and instead turns the gift of life into something that is meaningless.

From a moral perspective, the interference and interventions that must occur for man to produce life on earth interferes with the natural process of procreation as God intended. Man was created from God in his likeness with a soul, spirit and nature that is distinctly humanistic and well intentioned. Man was not created for the purpose of experimentation, personal pleasure or research. When one takes the power of creation into his own hands however, they do just this, create life for purposes other than what was originally intended. The ability to create life allows creation based on fancy, whim and for technical rather than strictly humanistic reasons, which is not an ethically sound or justifiable process.

Technological and biological advances have allowed man to have at his disposal the power of creation, but for the most part this power involves unforeseen consequences.

One simply can't predict the true harm that can be done by creating man from a Petri dish.

The act of artificial insemination also devalues the gift of life and supposes that man is an expert over humanity and spirituality. It requires that artificial and unspiritual means are utilized to obtain the primary components of creation, sperm and egg. It allows creation where perhaps creation was not intended, possibly for good reason, and supposes that man knows more than natural law or divine power.

Divine law dictates that God created man in his own image and likeness. Many use arguments in the bible to support the practice of in vitro fertilization. They claim that in vitro fertilization is one that God delivered to man as a power on earth. They further support this claim by stating that the bible supports in vitro. In Genesis the statement is made that "male and female he created them" (Gen 1:27)

and entrusted them the task of "having dominion over the earth (Gen:1:28)

. Some have interpreted this to mean that man can be dominant over everything and even creation.

However one must not abuse the scripture and interpret it in a manner that allows abuse of power and corruption, which is exactly what in vitro has the potential to do. Man is obligated to have rule over his dominion only in a manner that is humanistic and morally righteous. If one uses the argument of divine law, they must also accept and acknowledge the notion that life is a gift, one that can be bestowed and offered only by God himself.

Science and technology have in essence developed as a resource allowing the continued existence of man and the existence of human progress. Living in this technologically advanced environment man is obligated under divine law to act in a manner that is human, just and righteous. It is only possible for man to remain human and achieve self-realization if he acknowledges his true nature, moral obligation and acknowledges the spiritual soul.

Man is not simply "comprised of tissues and organs" but rather also consists of a spiritual and emotional nature that creates a unique personality, dignity and identity

Religious moralists support the notion that in vitro fertilization is an act that is similar to 'playing God.

" Lee M. Silver a biology professor at Princeton University suggests that in vitro fertilization marks "the dawn of a new age -- the point in history when human beings gained the power to seize control of their own evolutionary destiny.

" From a spiritual perspective, this goes against everything in the scripture.

In Vitro and Temptation

In vitro is morally objectionable because the process itself exposes man to temptations to accomplish immoral acts including bioengineering, and allows man to "override the natural law of nature" by taking into his own hands what should be in the hands of destiny

In a practical manner, one may interpret Silver's argument as saying that in vitro fertilization basically allows us to determine the future of our species. It allows us to create life from a scientific method, in a Petri dish, in a manner that is technical in nature rather than one that is spiritual. By this very act alone the process of in vitro is morally objectionable. The creation of human life is not something that should be determined in a laboratory. This takes away the miracle that is creation and turns it into an inhuman and morally objectionable practice. A process that is miraculous by nature becomes one that is scientific with the potential for abuse.

The use of in vitro fertilization has opened the door to many potentially destructive possibilities including genetic testing, engineering, cloning and more. All of these issues are morally objectionable, particularly issues involving genetic engineering and cloning.

The simple idea of genetic engineering and cloning suggests that human life is dispensable, subject to the whimsies and personal preferences of individuals at any given time. The process of bioengineering allows man to determine what life should and should not be created. It allows personal and subjective opinion to dictate what life is brought into the earth and what life is not. It would be impossible to establish a uniform and morally acceptable system of rules and regulations that could determine in what instances it would be ok vs. not ok to create life. Yet IVF by its very nature suggests that man has the power to do this.

Another reason that the practice is objectionable is it simply allows man too much power. It allows man who is by nature only human, the ability to determine what life is valuable, and to use that life for personal benefit rather than for the purpose it might have been intended.

In theory in vitro fertilization allows other morally objectionable practices including the possibility for a "woman some day to use a frozen embryo to give birth to a child that is genetically a relative (her great aunt or uncle)"

. It also allows the potential to collect sperm donations from people that are comatose or dead a practice "that ethicists liken to rape.

" The temptation to create life and subsequently abuse it is far too great when one considers the opportunities technology has presented.

Recently it was reported that a "widow actually gave birth to a child using sperm from her deceased husband," after which she sued for death benefits from Social Security Administration

. Stories such as this are not uncommon. This violates the very core of ethical reasoning and judgment. One can't decide what is right for a soul once it is deceased, but in vitro fertilization has allowed man to do just this. In the example given above the widow used in vitro to produce life from a human that had passed, and then proceeded to use the life created for personal benefit, further demonstrating the enormous potential for abuse that in vitro fertilization may result in.

There are even more stories in the news that suggest that man is tempted more and more with more uses for in vitro. Some have talked of using embryos to clone themselves so that they have a companion. In vitro is now a consideration for creation of embryos to use for stem cell research, another morally and ethically questionable practice. As technology continues to advance, it is only more likely that man will be tempted even further to use human life for his only whims and needs rather than for the purpose man was originally intended.

In vitro takes away that which is human and replaces it with greed, abuse of power and the potential for devastation.

In Vitro and the Destruction of Human Life

In vitro fertilization can also be utilized to help people pre-select their child's gender

. This means that life can be destroyed before it has even begun. This is a perfect example of how IVF and the potential for the creation of life can be abused to suit man's personal needs, whimsies and preferences. One can merely decide whether a person has the right to life or not based on purely subjective, emotional and other insignificant factors. In a Petri dish, one's destiny might be determined, and a life may be 'snuffed' out merely on the basis of gender. Such practice is not only morally but also ethically and spiritually unforgivable.

The Vatican actually has "predicted the potential for such experimentation and abuse of human embryos, and condemned in vitro" suggesting that it allows human beings "to set themselves us as givers of life and death.

" Specifically the Vatican claims that the process "divorces reproduction from the sexual union of married men and women" and also results in spare embryos, which opens the door for objectionable practices including destruction or cloning

In vitro is a technical action resulting in fertilization; it is not according to Pope John Paul II a fact achieved or willed "as the expression and fruit of a specific act of the conjugal union" and the generation of the human resulting is deprived of proper spiritual perfection which would result from the fruit of a conjugal act in which a spouse becomes "Cooperators with God for giving life to a new person"

. Conjugal love is a condition of marriage and a right of God as established by the Church, thus is the "only setting worthy of human creation

In vitro is indignant because it deprives the human creation that results from a technical process of the dignity associated with proper conjugal relations and creation

. Generally the Church has established that life and procreation should occur in a proper setting, and has defined that setting as resulting from the union of marriage and under the premise of family. The techniques required to acquire sperm constitute a setting that is morally illicit and ethically negative.

The conjugal act by nature should be ones that is personal and simultaneous, involving "the immediate cooperation on the part of husband and wife, which by the very nature of the agents and the proper nature of the act is the expression of the metal gift, which according to the Scripture brings about the union of one flesh.

" This is not the case with IVF. Further, those embryos that aren't needed are often disposed us, resulting in unnecessary and unjustified loss of life rather than creation of life.

Supporters of the process may claim that life need not be unnecessarily wasted. Instead the suggestion has been made that unused embryos be implanted in other people wanting children, or that the embryos be used for biotechnological processes. Again however, as argued previously this supposes that man should have the power to create, a power that was bestowed and meant to be a gift not a technical process.

Embryos that are donated to science have no choice in their destiny. They may be sorted, weeded or destroyed based on the whims of a particular researcher, potential parent or even mishap. There are even hundreds of embryos that simply expire because they are never utilized to begin with . These lives never have the opportunity to experience the gifts that God intended for them. Their destiny lies not in their own hands, and they have no power to rule over the kingdom that has been afforded the rest of man.

Conclusions

By nature the process of in vitro fertilization is one that is technical rather than spiritual; one that is inhuman vs. human and humane. It takes away all element of the spiritual, and prevents the creation of man as was originally intended, as a miraculous and spiritual process. Instead it allows man to create life and potentially abuse using rather random methods and justifications.

In vitro fertilization is morally objectionable because it deprives man of the right to life by the power of divine law. From a spiritual perspective IVF allows man to create or destroy human life based on personal whims, preferences and perceived needs ... which may or may not be valid.

The church does not support the process of in vitro fertilization, and instead argues that the gift of life is one that should be bestowed upon man as a result of a conjugal union only. Be taking the process into his own hands, man has opened the door for abuse and needless destruction of human life.

Man is not absolute in his power or judgment, yet IVF supposes that man is infinite in his knowledge and wisdom. Thus when one embryo is selected over another for life as is typically the case with bio-engineering, a life that might have been may be destroyed without morally dignified reason. In addition, the process of in vitro opens the door to excessive temptation and the potential for abuse, as evidenced by the current practices of gender selection and cloning.

Human life also has the potential to be needlessly destroyed as a result of in vitro. In vitro fertilization at its very core is morally, ethically and spiritually objectionable, and goes against everything that by natural law should be considered just and human. It takes humanity and turns it into a scientific experiment. One cannot justify the conversion of a natural and spiritual process into a technical and scientific one without harsh repercussions or severe consequences.

Outline:

In Vitro Fertilization

I. Introduction

a. In vitro Defined

b. Thesis: Moral Objection to In Vitro

i. In Vitro allows man to overstep boundaries

ii. Opens the door to temptation iii. Results in needless destruction of human life

II. Man and Authority

a. Life is a gift from god

i. Spiritual obligations of man

b. Divine law and man

i. Arguments for in vitro based on man as ruler of his kingdom

ii. Morally objectionable practices

III. In Vitro and Temptation

a. Process of in vitro and man's temptation

i. Morally objectionable practices to acquire sperm

b. Biotechnology

c. Improper use of embryos

IV. In Vitro and Destruction of Human Life

a. Death of embryos resulting from procedure

V. Conclusions

a. In vitro fertilization by nature is morally wrong and objectionable

Bibliography: Andrews, Lori B. (1999). The Clone Age: Adventures in the New World of Reproductive Technology, Henry Holt; from Schaeffer, P. (1999). "In Vitro Fertilization Widely Used." NCR Online. "Instruction on respect for human life." Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Available: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html Kass, Leon. (1998). The Ethics of Human Cloning. American Enterprise Institute; from Schaeffer (1999). Kevin O'Rourke, O.P. And Philip Boyle, (1999). Medical Ethics: Sources of Catholic Teaching. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. Pope Pius XII, Discourse to the Italian Catholic Union of Midwives, 29 October 1951: AAS 43 (1951) 850. Available from: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html POPE JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. 14: AAS 74 (1982) 96. Available from: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html Silver, Lee M. (1998). Remaking Eden: How Genetic Engineering and Cloning Will Transform the American Family. Avon. Retrieved from Schaeffer, 1999. Schaeffer, P. (1999). "In Vitro Fertilization Widely Used." NCR Online. 10, November, 2004: http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/101599/101599i.htm Remaking Eden: How Genetic Engineering and Cloning Will Transform the American Family, Lee M. Silver (Avon, 1998) The Clone Age: Adventures in the New World of Reproductive Technology, Lori. B. Andrews (Henry Holt, 1999) The Ethics of Human Cloning, Leon Kass (American Enterprise Institute, 1998)