Is it okay to make "*good*" use of fetuses acquired by "termination" for study?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sidetrack
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sidetrack

Guest
I remember once how my dad said that in a science class in El Salvador when he was boy for some reason one of the things he saw in jars was a human fetus 😊.

_ I’ve been thinking that with China’s birth control policy it would make sense that they woud have some of the most thorough studies on embryology done on the planet…wouldn’t it :ehh:😊 ?.***I’m not ***supporting that vile act but I’m just asking whether it be good to “make the best use of it” if in places where this act is allowed and if for whatever reason the child can’t be properly buried, that it woud be used for embryological studies so we can have a better understanding of how a deformity might’ve hapened in the womb if not just prenatal development in general?.

😦 Actually just thinking about that makes me think if anyone were to look at the history of embryology well before the era of advanced body cameras,outside of natural miscarriages how we got all the data we have on embyrology now is a morally stomach wrenching course of actions that might even make James Marion Sims (considered the “father of gynecology”) actions like experimenting on black slaves againest their will seem minor ‘~’.

Their are termination that happen for self-centered reasons like population control and bc of the personal desicion taken by those who unfortunatey didn’t coudn’t find a reason for bringing the child into existence,I know that.We can debate with that camp in our own way.

Yet there are also those who didn’t bring the child into this life b/c of some something that happened in development and that was reason that was used to justify it.Maybe it had to do with the functionings of the woman’s ower region and/or maybe there was a biological shortcoming of some sort with the child.A part of me is asking right now that it in places where this happen would it be better to make that child’s death not have been as much in vain ***if ***(with the utmost respect obviously;absorbing what is observed with care,proceeding into further knowledge with caution) they are responsibly examined to make sure that other children’s prenatal deveopment doesnt take those turns and thus lowering the occurences of these things happening and thereby lower the amounts of terminations that are permitted b/c of unfavorable prenatal deveopments?.
 
Would that not fall under the “some good can come from this evil act” camp?
Funny that so many threads lately keep coming up with that angle?

Using the murder of babies to foster research has no difference than what the Doctors did in the 3rd Reich of Nazi Germany.

No matter what good can come from it, it’s tainted with human blood and future generations will look with horror at why it was allowed to happen.
 
sidetrack said:
I remember once how my dad said that in a science class in El Salvador when he was boy for some reason one of the things he saw in jars was a human fetus 😊.

_ I’ve been thinking that with China’s birth control policy it would make sense that they woud have some of the most thorough studies on embryology done on the planet…wouldn’t it :ehh:😊 ?.***I’m not ***supporting that vile act but I’m just asking whether it be good to “make the best use of it” if in places where this act is allowed and if for whatever reason the child can’t be properly buried, that it woud be used for embryological studies so we can have a better understanding of how a deformity might’ve hapened in the womb if not just prenatal development in general?.

😦 Actually just thinking about that makes me think if anyone were to look at the history of embryology well before the era of advanced body cameras,outside of natural miscarriages how we got all the data we have on embyrology now is a morally stomach wrenching course of actions that might even make James Marion Sims (considered the “father of gynecology”) actions like experimenting on black slaves againest their will seem minor ‘~’.

Their are termination that happen for self-centered reasons like population control and bc of the personal desicion taken by those who unfortunatey didn’t coudn’t find a reason for bringing the child into existence,I know that.We can debate with that camp in our own way.

Yet there are also those who didn’t bring the child into this life b/c of some something that happened in development and that was reason that was used to justify it.Maybe it had to do with the functionings of the woman’s ower region and/or maybe there was a biological shortcoming of some sort with the child.A part of me is asking right now that it in places where this happen would it be better to make that child’s death not have been as much in vain ***if ***(with the utmost respect obviously;absorbing what is observed with care,proceeding into further knowledge with caution) they are responsibly examined to make sure that other children’s prenatal deveopment doesnt take those turns and thus lowering the occurences of these things happening and thereby lower the amounts of terminations that are permitted b/c of unfavorable prenatal deveopments?.
Click to expand...
It is intrinsically evil to use embryos for experimentation or research in a way that hurts or mutilates them, regardless of how the embryos are attained.

Even if the intent is to do good things with these embryos, it is still wrong because of the circumstances; those are real human beings with real rights and souls.
 
In cases of miscarriage or natural death of the fetus, I think this passage from the Catechism may be relevant:
(from 2301) Autopsies can be morally permitted for legal inquests or scientific research.
Click to expand...
The Catechism states elsewhere (2295) that informed consent (of the parents) is required, and (2300) the body must be treated with respect and charity.

However, the morality of using aborted embryos or fetuses for science or medicine is another question, to which I believe the short answer is no.
 
Even if the baby died from natural causes? Can a parent not donate the babies body to science? Being born isn’t “the line”, is it?

(Answered as i was typing.)
 
sidetrack said:
I remember once how my dad said that in a science class in El Salvador when he was boy for some reason one of the things he saw in jars was a human fetus 😊.
Click to expand...
It was most like a natural victim of miscarriage. El Salvador is a largely Catholic country, and no doctor would proudly display the victim of an abortion he himself induced.
 
sidetrack said:
I remember once how my dad said that in a science class in El Salvador when he was boy for some reason one of the things he saw in jars was a human fetus 😊.

_ I’ve been thinking that with China’s birth control policy it would make sense that they woud have some of the most thorough studies on embryology done on the planet…wouldn’t it :ehh:😊 ?.***I’m not ***supporting that vile act but I’m just asking whether it be good to “make the best use of it” if in places where this act is allowed and if for whatever reason the child can’t be properly buried, that it woud be used for embryological studies so we can have a better understanding of how a deformity might’ve hapened in the womb if not just prenatal development in general?.

😦 Actually just thinking about that makes me think if anyone were to look at the history of embryology well before the era of advanced body cameras,outside of natural miscarriages how we got all the data we have on embyrology now is a morally stomach wrenching course of actions that might even make James Marion Sims (considered the “father of gynecology”) actions like experimenting on black slaves againest their will seem minor ‘~’.

Their are termination that happen for self-centered reasons like population control and bc of the personal desicion taken by those who unfortunatey didn’t coudn’t find a reason for bringing the child into existence,I know that.We can debate with that camp in our own way.

Yet there are also those who didn’t bring the child into this life b/c of some something that happened in development and that was reason that was used to justify it.Maybe it had to do with the functionings of the woman’s ower region and/or maybe there was a biological shortcoming of some sort with the child.A part of me is asking right now that it in places where this happen would it be better to make that child’s death not have been as much in vain ***if ***(with the utmost respect obviously;absorbing what is observed with care,proceeding into further knowledge with caution) they are responsibly examined to make sure that other children’s prenatal deveopment doesnt take those turns and thus lowering the occurences of these things happening and thereby lower the amounts of terminations that are permitted b/c of unfavorable prenatal deveopments?.
Click to expand...
There is no ‘good’ in this idea. None. An embryo that is examined for defects prior to birth cannot be aborted. The answer would be genetic engineering to repair the embryo or drugs that might stop the development of a defect in the embryo. At present, no such technology exists. In a few cases, once the embryo has developed further, it is possible to go in and repair a defect or remove a cancerous growth. Then the baby would be born and not suffer from the defect, but this type of surgery is relatively new.

Peace,
Ed
 
sidetrack said:
😦 Actually just thinking about that makes me think if anyone were to look at the history of embryology well before the era of advanced body cameras,outside of natural miscarriages how we got all the data we have on embyrology now is a morally stomach wrenching course of actions that might even make James Marion Sims (considered the “father of gynecology”) actions like experimenting on black slaves againest their will seem minor ‘~’.
.
Click to expand...
Most (as in >99%) of the development of Embryology as a branch of Science (Biology) was done using animals. Amphibians, Fish, Birds, Salamanders, Reptilians…due to the technology of the microscope and the microtome, along with stains to observe different types of cells and tissues.

And no, your example of current use is not “okay” morally or ethically.
 
Restricting research to natural miscarriages is one thing.

One possible consequence of “benign” research on parts or tissues from fetuses from induced abortions is that you could create a secondary market for the “products” of abortion. I don’t know how big that effect is, but it means another opportunity for someone to profit off of it.
 
JanetF said:
in short NO! Evil for the sake of good is still evil.
Click to expand...
The research in itself is not inherently evil, however, as others have pointed out the temptation to use abortion as a “source” of and treating fetuses as “material” for research is what causes that research to be immoral.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top