Ivf - is it moral?

  • Thread starter Thread starter the_Assyrian_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

the_Assyrian_1

Guest
dear friends,

Let us ponder how Jesus was alone in this world.

IS IVF moral? I heard the bbc raving on about it some professor getting a nobel prize?

Something looks a miss but what do I know?

please do tell me… arguements welcome with catholic standing…

many thanks…

your brother mark
 
It is not moral. It separates the conjugal and procreative act.

The BBC loves to deviate from the magisterium of the catholic church. They have been doing this for a long time.

Trust me, we are in a spiritual battle and the BBC is on the other side.
 
According to the teachings of the Catholic Church, one of the reasons why IVF is forbidden is because it eliminates the “unitive” property of procreation that is required. Many of the other problems with IVF that the Church has can be eliminated from the equation, such as the freezing of additional/unused embryos (by only fertilizing eggs that you will implant).

IMOHO, it is not immoral to use IVF. I don’t see anything wrong with it whatsoever. However, it is against Catholic Church teaching, and therefore a Catholic is not allowed to use IVF to conceive, regardless of whether they agree with the Church teaching or not.

I can’t deny that IVF has helped many couples conceive, and has brought great joy to many families. One also can’t deny that any “tool” can be abused to do “bad” things. Just like any “tool” can be used for good. And of course, children who are products of IVF are just as much human as anyone else, and hardly an “abomination”.

It is not against other religions that I know of. I know that Jewish couples can use IVF, and IIRC, even Muslim couples, can use IVF. No other Christian denomination that I know of is forbidden from using it (Baptist, Lutheran, etc).
 
Rence said:
According to the teachings of the Catholic Church, one of the reasons why IVF is forbidden is because it eliminates the “unitive” property of procreation that is required. Many of the other problems with IVF that the Church has can be eliminated from the equation, such as the freezing of additional/unused embryos (by only fertilizing eggs that you will implant).

IMOHO, it is not immoral to use IVF. I don’t see anything wrong with it whatsoever. However, it is against Catholic Church teaching, and therefore a Catholic is not allowed to use IVF to conceive, regardless of whether they agree with the Church teaching or not.

I can’t deny that IVF has helped many couples conceive, and has brought great joy to many families. One also can’t deny that any “tool” can be abused to do “bad” things. Just like any “tool” can be used for good. And of course, children who are products of IVF are just as much human as anyone else, and hardly an “abomination”.

It is not against other religions that I know of. I know that Jewish couples can use IVF, and IIRC, even Muslim couples, can use IVF. No other Christian denomination that I know of is forbidden from using it (Baptist, Lutheran, etc).
Click to expand...
But aren’t unused embryos eventually killed?

I don’t like it because I don’t like the idea of children being frozen for long periods of time before they’re not wanted. That’s not right.
 
Marc_Anthony said:
But aren’t unused embryos eventually killed?

I don’t like it because I don’t like the idea of children being frozen for long periods of time before they’re not wanted. That’s not right.
Click to expand...
That’s why I said: “(…only fertilizing eggs that you will implant).”

To answer your question about what happens to unused embryos, some sit in the freezer for years to be used later (a couple was in the news last week for using an egg years after conceiving their first one), some are used by couples unrelated to the embryo, some unfortunately are donated to medical research, and some are destroyed.
 
Rence said:
That’s why I said: “(…only fertilizing eggs that you will implant).”

To answer your question about what happens to unused embryos, some sit in the freezer for years to be used later (a couple was in the news last week for using an egg years after conceiving their first one), some are used by couples unrelated to the embryo, some unfortunately are donated to medical research, and some are destroyed.
Click to expand...
Hmm, interesting. Question then: Has it been infallibly declared that the Church must be against all forms of IVF? Or can the decision be reversed?
 
IVF is immoral for multiple reasons. I shall tackle them in no particular order.
  1. It assumes a dominion over reproduction in a similar way contraception does. The dominion assumed is of a somewhat different nature, essentially saying “God, I have a right to children when I want them and how. They are my commodity to buy and sell,” with your deciding to have a child when you are unable to the natural way and not giving the Lord credit for knowing how to do His job and fertilizing eggs outside of the conjugal act, which leads to my next point.
  2. It removes the conjugal act from reproduction. Stirring semen and eggs together in a test tube is not the marital embrace, and has no place to replace it. A couple can not give themselves completely to each other as they do in intercourse this way. How you acquire sperm to fertilize the egg? Through masturbation, a vile self-centered sexual act.
  3. The practice of IVF always involves abortion. The eggs that are deemed unworthy of implantation for whatever reason are destroyed. Murder is a grave offense, especially so the murder of a completely defenseless child.
 
thanks everyone…

I consider you my brothers and sisters in Christ for sharing this Life changing knowledge with me… dont worry I wasnt considering it but I am really thankful to you for sharing the truth with me… it matters to know the truth… and this country is in great need if thats what the bbc are doing!!! My word what a state!

Thankyou once more… be blessed all of you,…I mean it… xxx

brother mark
 
Marc_Anthony said:
Hmm, interesting. Question then: Has it been infallibly declared that the Church must be against all forms of IVF? Or can the decision be reversed?
Click to expand...
I don’t know Marc. It’s not a dogma. But it is a teaching. I hope and pray that it changes in the future. I am of the belief that people using IVF are not trying to act like God, they just want a child. IMOHO, using IVF is not trying to play God anymore than someone being hooked up to a heart-lung machine during a bypass cardiac surgery, having their heart stop pumping by medications so that the non-beating/non-moving heart can be operated on, with all the tools of modern medication trying to defy the natural aging process. The teaching seems to me a contradiction in many ways that I just don’t understand, one way being that it’s given that the Church places such value on procreation, making children the “crowning glory” of a marriage, even to the point of obviously burdening married couples (given the usage of contraception among Catholics, and the refusal to have bigger families). We are taught by the Church that you have to have “grave reason” to use NFP to avoid getting pregnant. So it doesn’t make sense that one cannot use IVF to get pregnant. It especially doesn’t make sense to me when the sperm is the husband’s and the egg is the wife’s (and not other donors), and only what is implanted is fertilized. We can argue that IVF is “unnatural” but so is any other medical treatment/therapy. Anyhow, Marc here’s what the CCC says about IVF:
2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ "right to become a father and a mother only through each other."166
Click to expand...
2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that "entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children."167 "Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses’ union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person."168
Click to expand...
 
the_Assyrian said:
thanks everyone…

I consider you my brothers and sisters in Christ for sharing this Life changing knowledge with me… dont worry I wasnt considering it but I am really thankful to you for sharing the truth with me… it matters to know the truth… and this country is in great need if thats what the bbc are doing!!! My word what a state!

Thankyou once more… be blessed all of you,…I mean it… xxx

brother mark
Click to expand...
It’s always helpful to know what the Church teaches, so that Catholics can make informed decisions that will keep them in good standing with the Church 🙂
 
the_Assyrian said:
dear friends,

Let us ponder how Jesus was alone in this world.

IS IVF moral? I heard the bbc raving on about it some professor getting a nobel prize?

Something looks a miss but what do I know?

please do tell me… arguements welcome with catholic standing…

many thanks…

your brother mark
Click to expand...
IMO I see nothing wrong with it AS LONG as only one embryo is made and implanted at a time. However unless you are celebrity-rich you won’t be able to afford to do that.

I think each time IVF is tried it’s like $10,000 and in that case like 5 embryos are implanted? Could be wrong though.

So if someone can afford to spend 100,000+ on IVF then I say go for it. Otherwise NO!
 
***3. The practice of IVF always involves abortion. The eggs that are deemed unworthy of implantation for whatever reason are destroyed. Murder is a grave offense, especially so the murder of a completely defenseless child. ***

Sorry I didn’t quote above. I just wanted to say that the **eggs **that are deemed unworthy are discarded in step one. Not embryos. Also, if an embryo doesn’t survive after implantation (ie it doesn’t divide into a multi-celled embryo from a fertilized egg) then it is (and I hate this word) also discarded. For every fertilized egg that survives to implant there are 1-2 eggs that either don’t fertilize or don’t survive after implantation. After that, the “viable” eggs are implanted into the potential mother. Usually all the eggs do not survive. This also happens naturally, when an egg fertilizes and does not attach to the wall of the uterus. This is not abortion.

Up until attachment, the correct phrase is not abortion. Abortion can only be used if attachment has happened. After that, it can be spontaneous or deliberate. When a mother implants ten embryos and six attach then she “thins” the babies to two, that is abortion and murder. What happens before, once fertilization of the egg occurs, is still a deliberate “discarding” of life, but it is not the same as abortion.

This type of loss of life actually happens in nature more often than we think. I have read an independent study (an evidence based study, so facts) that stated a couple rounds of IVF would yield about the number of losses as a normal sex life of a fertile couple. Sometimes a few more, sometimes a few less, but almost always very close to the same number.

I am not saying I agree or disagree with this. I know the Church is against IVF and I am hoping they find an alternitive in the future they agree with. I just wanted to put a little fact out there so we who are putting the Church’s opinion out there can do it in a way that others can not dispute it. Good luck with your search.

PS - they can harvest eggs and sperm seperatly. Then join them as they do the implantations. That way, no embryos are frozen. They won’t do one at a time, but they will join until they get two or three and implant a “managable” number of children for a couple so they will not have to be thinned if they all implant. Just a FYI. The doctors feel this allows nature (God) to choose as they give the embryos every chance possible for survival and leave the rest up to God.
 
Oh, and IVF is comprable to adoption. Prices have come down and some of the drugs and procedures are covered by insurance. So $100,000.00 is not a true number anymore. 10 - 30 thousand is more realistic.
 
Rence said:
I don’t know Marc. It’s not a dogma. But it is a teaching. I hope and pray that it changes in the future. I am of the belief that people using IVF are not trying to act like God, they just want a child. IMOHO, using IVF is not trying to play God anymore than someone being hooked up to a heart-lung machine during a bypass cardiac surgery, having their heart stop pumping by medications so that the non-beating/non-moving heart can be operated on, with all the tools of modern medication trying to defy the natural aging process. The teaching seems to me a contradiction in many ways that I just don’t understand, one way being that it’s given that the Church places such value on procreation, making children the “crowning glory” of a marriage, even to the point of obviously burdening married couples (given the usage of contraception among Catholics, and the refusal to have bigger families). We are taught by the Church that you have to have “grave reason” to use NFP to avoid getting pregnant. So it doesn’t make sense that one cannot use IVF to get pregnant. It especially doesn’t make sense to me when the sperm is the husband’s and the egg is the wife’s (and not other donors), and only what is implanted is fertilized. We can argue that IVF is “unnatural” but so is any other medical treatment/therapy. Anyhow, Marc here’s what the CCC says about IVF:
Click to expand...
It is different than any medical procedure such as a heart-lung machine during a bypass surgery because the marital act, the physical joining of the husband and wife is what creates life. You are not creating a new life during a bypass surgery, you are trying to sustain an already existing life. Its not just the medical procedure that the Church objects to in IVF. The Church is all for medical advancements and modern science, as long as it doesn’t tamper with the natural order of the way life is created by God. The Church is against IVF because it no longer involves the maritial relationship, the physical act just between a husband and a wife. That actual physical act, when a husband and wife become one, is so precious and important that the Church will do everything it can to protect it. A majority of people think the Church is against sex, it isn’t, the ruling of IVF is a case in point that the Church is saying sex between a husband and wife and the results of a new life are so precious that they need to be preserved even to the point that people will be heartbroken that IVF is not a viable choice for Catholics.
 
PatriceA said:
It is different than any medical procedure such as a heart-lung machine during a bypass surgery because the marital act, the physical joining of the husband and wife is what creates life. You are not creating a new life during a bypass surgery, you are trying to sustain an already existing life. Its not just the medical procedure that the Church objects to in IVF. The Church is all for medical advancements and modern science, as long as it doesn’t tamper with the natural order of the way life is created by God. The Church is against IVF because it no longer involves the maritial relationship, the physical act just between a husband and a wife. That actual physical act, when a husband and wife become one, is so precious and important that the Church will do everything it can to protect it. A majority of people think the Church is against sex, it isn’t, the ruling of IVF is a case in point that the Church is saying sex between a husband and wife and the results of a new life are so precious that they need to be preserved even to the point that people will be heartbroken that IVF is not a viable choice for Catholics.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand all that, thank you 🙂 I was using the bypass surgery as an example. Many solutions to natural problems are not “natural”, and they do tamper with the “natural order” of life, yet they are still approved. I understand that saving a life, or prolonging a life, is not the same as conceiving one. I still don’t agree with the Church’s teaching regarding IVF and even its teaching about sex, but that’s the way it is. I haven’t broken any rules, I just don’t agree. And I pray that for those who can’t conceive the “natural” way, that they change this teaching in the future.
 
Pope John Paul II: “The various techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life. Apart from the fact that they are morally unacceptable, since they separate procreation from the fully human context of the conjugal act, these techniques have a high rate of failure: not just failure in relation to fertilization but with regard to the subsequent development of the embryo, which is exposed to the risk of death, generally within a very short space of time. Furthermore, the number of embryos produced is often greater than that needed for implantation in the woman’s womb, and these so-called ‘spare embryos’ are then destroyed or used for research which, under the pretext of scientific or medical progress, in fact reduces human life to the level of simple ‘biological material’ to be freely disposed of.” (Evangelium Vitae, n. 14.)
 
Rence said:
Yes, I understand all that, thank you 🙂 I was using the bypass surgery as an example. Many solutions to natural problems are not “natural”, and they do tamper with the “natural order” of life, yet they are still approved. I understand that saving a life, or prolonging a life, is not the same as conceiving one. I still don’t agree with the Church’s teaching regarding IVF and even its teaching about sex, but that’s the way it is. I haven’t broken any rules, I just don’t agree. And I pray that for those who can’t conceive the “natural” way, that they change this teaching in the future.
Click to expand...
IVF is gravely sinful. And we as Catholics really should not disagree with this teaching or the teachings on sex… This is not an “open for opinion or debate” thing…

Such teaching will not change anymore than the one on adultery…or contraception…or murder…or blasphemy…or lying in court…

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html
On this and on other issues…We all need to “renew our minds”…

I very much urge the slow reading and prayerful meditation on this homily of Pope Benedict XVI

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html

One of my favorites…(keep reading it to the end…it IS the right homily)
 
Bookcat said:
IVF is gravely sinful. And we as Catholics really should not disagree with this teaching or the teachings on sex… This is not an “open for opinion or debate” thing…

Such teaching will not change anymore than the one on adultery…or contraception…or murder…or blasphemy…or lying in court…
Click to expand...
I understand that the Catholic Church teaches that IVF is gravely sinful, as I’ve said above. And you can disagree with this and any other teaching, as long as you follow the rules. After all, we are not mindless. I can’t just say I agree with something when I don’t. I appreciate the link, thank you 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top