It is impossible to drive down the freeway without seeing billboards advertising infertility clinics, often showing a smiling baby, labeled ‘an IVF miracle.’ While we sympathize with couples struggling with the burden of infertility, as Pro-Lifers, we cannot support in vitro fertilization, as it leads to the destruction of human embryos.
Because more than one embryo is often transferred to increase the success rate of implantation, there is a greater chance for high-risk multiple pregnancies. In these cases, “selective reduction” often occurs, which consists of aborting one or more of the babies based on genetic testing, gender selection, or even the location of the fetus most accessible to the doctor. The leftover embryos which are not implanted in the womb are left to be frozen, experimented on, or destroyed. The manipulation of human embryos in a laboratory contradicts a consistent life ethic that respects the dignity of the human person.
One must consider the ethical implications of in vitro fertilization. There is a great danger for children to be valued only as commodities. In an article featured in The Washington Post, Katrina Clark exposes a much darker side of in vitro fertilization. As the daughter of an anonymous sperm donor, Katrina grew up longing to know her father. “I realized that I am, in a sense, a freak…” she wrote. “I really, truly would never have a dad. I finally understood what it meant to be donor-conceived, and I hated it.” Kristina felt resentment towards the process as it is viewed as a success only if the parents and recipient are happy, while neglecting the well-being of the child conceived. Katrina’s explanation is powerful:
I’m here to tell you that emotionally, many of us are not keeping up. We didn’t ask to be born into this situation, with its limitations and confusion. It’s hypocritical of parents and medical professionals to assume that biological roots won’t matter to the “products” of the cryobanks’ service, when the longing for a biological relationship is what brings customers to the banks in the first place.
In vitro fertilization violates the natural law and tramples on the dignity of the human person, allowing children to be exploited as means rather than treated as ends in themselves.
Katrina stated: “When I read some of the mother’s thoughts about their choice for conception, it made me feel degraded to nothing more than a vial of frozen sperm. It seemed to me that most of the mothers and donors give little thought to the feelings of the children who would result from their actions.”
By reducing human life to material for scientists to manipulate in a petri dish, in vitro fertilization can quickly give way to genetic engineering and cloning. With the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003, scientists possess knowledge of the genetic sequence and have a greater ability to modify genes. As pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, can already screen for disease and gender, advances in selecting physical features, such as eye-color, hair-color, and more are underway. The possibility of a Gattaca-like future with “designer babies” is a real concern.
In an effort to support couples who struggle with infertility, while maintaining a respect for human life at the earliest stages of development, we should look towards Pro-Life alternatives, like NaProTECHNOLOGY, which focuses on working with a woman’s cycle to identify and treat the diseases which cause infertility.
Read Katrina’s full story:
Clark, Katrina. “My Father Was an Anonymous Sperm Donor.” The Washington Post. 17 December 2006. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/12/15/AR2006121501820.html)
