Ivf - is it moral?

[Newbie2]

One also can’t deny that any “tool” can be abused to do “bad” things.

Indeed.

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.

You mean comparable in the financial outlay, not morally comparable, right?

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

And as long as you don’t take your disagreement public.

 

[PatriceA]

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

I hope you didn’t mean that those of us that do agree with the teachings on IVF are mindless and haven’t used our intelligence to come to understand and accept why the Church says IVF is immoral. Correct me if I’m wrong.

 

[ccpoisonivy]

You mean comparable in the financial outlay, not morally comparable, right?

Sorry for any confusion - Yes, I meant financially, not morally. That is why I placed the prices after that statement.

I also disagree with this; however, I know the rules. That does not mean that they aren’t broken every day. My local Catholic hospital offers IVF. I have spoken to a priest that does not agree that IVF is immoral - he actually said (his belief) that as long as the couple is completely infertal **and **they are still sexually active within their relationship, they can lovingly concieve using IVF. Also as long as only as many human embryos are “made” as are used at a time and all that are made are implanted then it is ok.

I know that this is against the teachings, so please do not correct me, you may correct him, however. If I had not asked on this site, I would not have had a correct view of the teachings of the Church. I am still very confused about the teachings regarding this - I understand the answer is “no”, but I do not understand why, if a couple is completely infertil and are still copulating, why they can not have “help” uniting their sperm and egg.

Women are allowed to use hormones to produce more eggs. Either sex may have surgeries to straighten tubes to allow eggs or sperm to pass. You may even have surgery to remove an embryo from the fallopian tube to try to save the life and have it reimplant in the uterus! I honestly see this as messing with the natural state of the body. I know that there is not a lab helping with the conception, but it seems to me (my opinion, nothing more) that if IVF is not approved, none of this should.

Again, I understand the rules, I’m just stating my opinion, my view. And stating that it is very hard to know the real rules when so many people “in charge” are putting their opinion before Church teachings.

 

[Rence]

I hope you didn’t mean that those of us that do agree with the teachings on IVF are mindless and haven’t used our intelligence to come to understand and accept why the Church says IVF is immoral. Correct me if I’m wrong.

I’m correcting you because you’re wrong If you agree with the teachings of the Church regarding IVF, then you agree with them. It’s easy to say you agree with a teaching, when in fact, you do. It’s much easier to accept a teaching when you actually agree with it and believe it, right?

But when you don’t agree with a teaching, or at least when I don’t agree with a teaching, it’s not possible for me to lie and give lip service and just say I agree with it, when in fact, I don’t. I acknowledge the Church rules, and the Church teachings regarding a matter. I know I still have to follow it, but I can’t agree with it when I truly don’t agree with it. When asked about a Church teaching, I will tell what the Church teaches as best as I can, and refer to the CCC about it. But I won’t say I agree with it, if I don’t.

I also can’t let others do the thinking for me, which would make me mindless (IMOHO). NOT SAYING THIS HAS HAPPENED ON THIS THREAD, BUT: being told to “just not think about it, and let the Church do the thinking for you, especially when you disagree with the Church” is unrealistic for me. I have been told this on other threads and in private messages. And frankly, I find it insultive, though believe me I realize the sender is not trying to be insultive. Telling me not to think, that the Church will do that for me, tells me to be mindless and not use my intelligence. This is what I’m talking about when I say “we are not mindless. I can’t just say I agree with something when I don’t”. I hope that clears it up for you : )

 

[Rence]

I also disagree with this; however, I know the rules. That does not mean that they aren’t broken every day. My local Catholic hospital offers IVF. I have spoken to a priest that does not agree that IVF is immoral - he actually said (his belief) that as long as the couple is completely infertal **and **they are still sexually active within their relationship, they can lovingly concieve using IVF. Also as long as only as many human embryos are “made” as are used at a time and all that are made are implanted then it is ok.

I know that this is against the teachings, so please do not correct me, you may correct him, however. If I had not asked on this site, I would not have had a correct view of the teachings of the Church. I am still very confused about the teachings regarding this - I understand the answer is “no”, but I do not understand why, if a couple is completely infertil and are still copulating, why they can not have “help” uniting their sperm and egg.

Women are allowed to use hormones to produce more eggs. Either sex may have surgeries to straighten tubes to allow eggs or sperm to pass. You may even have surgery to remove an embryo from the fallopian tube to try to save the life and have it reimplant in the uterus! I honestly see this as messing with the natural state of the body. I know that there is not a lab helping with the conception, but it seems to me (my opinion, nothing more) that if IVF is not approved, none of this should.

Again, I understand the rules, I’m just stating my opinion, my view. And stating that it is very hard to know the real rules when so many people “in charge” are putting their opinion before Church teachings.

We are still allowed to pray that one day the Magisterium will find new meaning in their sources for this teaching, and will allow infertile married couples to use IVF with limitations that perserve life. In the meantime, those of us who don’t agree with the current teaching will just have to be burdened with having to follow the teaching, even though we don’t agree with it.

 

[Bookcat]

We are still allowed to pray that one day the Magisterium will find new meaning in their sources for this teaching, and will allow infertile married couples to use IVF with limitations that perserve life. In the meantime, those of us who don’t agree with the current teaching will just have to be burdened with having to follow the teaching, even though we don’t agree with it.

Such would be like praying that the earth be flat.

or like praying that the Church will find it to be the case the murder is ok for married couples who do not like being married anymore…for it is “til death do we part”…

or like praying that man not be man or women not be woman.

For such will never and can never happen…

Life can never take place in this manner …not morally that is (even if they were to "find a way to not kill lives in the process or freeze them…such will never be moral)

(in any case… it is always important to conform our minds and wills to the teachings of the Church…seeking the “renewal of the mind” that Paul and Pope Benedict XVI speak of vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html)

 

[Bookcat]

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

We need to conform our “minds” as well…to renew them…

"We become new if we let ourselves be grasped and shaped by the new Man, Jesus Christ. He is the new Man par excellence. In him the new human existence became reality and we can truly become new if we deliver ourselves into his hands and let ourselves be moulded by him.

Paul makes this process of “recasting” even clearer by saying that we become new if we transform our way of thinking. What has been introduced here with “way of thinking” is the Greek term “nous”. It is a complex word. It may be translated as “spirit”, “sentiments”, “reason”, and precisely, also by “way of thinking”. Thus our reason must become new. This surprises us. We might have expected instead that this would have concerned some attitude: what we should change in our behaviour. But no: renewal must go to the very core. Our way of looking at the world, of understanding reality all our thought must change from its foundations. The reasoning of the former person, the common way of thinking is usually directed to possession, well-being, influence, success, fame and so forth. Yet in this way its scope is too limited. Thus, in the final analysis, one’s “self” remains the centre of the world. We must learn to think more profoundly. St Paul tells us what this means in the second part of the sentence: it is necessary to learn to understand God’s will, so that it may shape our own will. This is in order that we ourselves may desire what God desires, because we recognize that what God wants is the beautiful and the good. It is therefore a question of a turning point in our fundamental spiritual orientation. God must enter into the horizon of our thought: what he wants and the way in which he conceived of the world and of me. We must learn to share in the thinking and the will of Jesus Christ. It is then that we will be new people in whom a new world emerges." --Pope Benedict XVI in the above link

 

[Bookcat]

And even in things not “defined”…we are to give a religious assent. A religious submission of mind and will…(not just actions). A religious submission of intellect…and will…this is required…

Then it is a matter of seeking understanding…

Not of praying the earth will be flat after all…

If one reflects on Pope Benedict XVI’ homily above…it is very helpful…for we need to a “renewal of the mind”…

oh and of course many things are actually matters of Faith per se…from Divine Revelation or defined by the Church…calling for a “obedience of Faith”…

 

[Bookcat]

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

Many things must be given the “obedience of Faith”…(see Paul, LG 25 and Canon 750 etc)

And even in things not “defined” etc…we are to give a religious assent. A religious submission of mind and will…(not just actions). A religious submission of intellect…and will…this is required…(see LG 25 an Canon 752)

Then it is becomes a matter of submitting ones mind and will and then seeking understanding…

Not of praying the earth will be flat after all…

If one reflects on Pope Benedict XVI’ homily above…it is very helpful…for we need to a “renewal of the mind”…

 

[Bookcat]

You see…we may not “understand” why such a teaching is or why such a reality is…

but some things are of the Faith per se (see LG 25)…and these we live the “obedience of faith”…we believe and seek to understand (faith seeking understanding)…other things require at least the submission of mind and will…and then we still seek to understand more and more…

Not everyone understands to the same degree…in matters of the Teachings of the Church …just as in other areas of life…I do not get sayyy Music…(though my wife does) but I do enjoy the beauty of it…

We encounter Jesus Christ…and come to know him and to know that in him is life…

true life.

That he has the words of eternal life…and we enter his Church…knowing that it is his Church that he guides by the Holy Spirit…where we find life in Christ…and his teachings and the implications of them. Some things we may understand more than others…but we follow him accepting his word and the word of his Church (even if thoughts tempt us otherwise at times…or we do not fully understand…for we know the source)…joyfully knowing and following him.

 

[Impertinens]

The main problem is that ivf creates many embryos, and then many of them are destroyed or fail to implant and die.

If one agrees that embryos have personhood, this is obviously unacceptable.

If there existed some ivf method which created only one embryo and which did not increase significantly the probability of his/her death compared to a natural conception… well, I do not know, there would still be the problem of the separation between procreation and conjugal act, but perhaps this could be acceptable if no other way existed.

It could still be a disordered act, I am not sure of that, but it would not be murder as the current forms of IVF are.

 

[Bookcat]

If there existed some ivf method which created only one embryo and which did not increase significantly the probability of his/her death compared to a natural conception… well, I do not know, there would still be the problem of the separation between procreation and conjugal act, but perhaps this could be acceptable if no other way existed.

It could still be a disordered act, I am not sure of that, but it would not be murder as the current forms of IVF are.

yes it would…such is the Teaching of the Church…you are correct. Gravely disordered.

 

[Rence]

The main problem is that ivf creates many embryos, and then many of them are destroyed or fail to implant and die.

If one agrees that embryos have personhood, this is obviously unacceptable.

If there existed some ivf method which created only one embryo and which did not increase significantly the probability of his/her death compared to a natural conception… well, I do not know, there would still be the problem of the separation between procreation and conjugal act, but perhaps this could be acceptable if no other way existed.

It could still be a disordered act, I am not sure of that, but it would not be murder as the current forms of IVF are.

There is no requirement to create more embryos than are implanted. A couple can arrange to only fertilize the number of eggs that will be implanted so that none are wasted or frozen for later use. As for embryos failing to implant and die, that happens with natural conceptions too

 

[Bookcat]

ncbcenter.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=278

 

[Newbie2]

Sorry for any confusion - Yes, I meant financially, not morally. That is why I placed the prices after that statement.

I also disagree with this; however, I know the rules. That does not mean that they aren’t broken every day. My local Catholic hospital offers IVF. I have spoken to a priest that does not agree that IVF is immoral - he actually said (his belief) that as long as the couple is completely infertal **and **they are still sexually active within their relationship, they can lovingly concieve using IVF. **

**I know that this is against the teachings, so please do not correct me, you may correct him, however. If I had not asked on this site, I would not have had a correct view of the teachings of the Church. I am still very confused about the teachings regarding this - I understand the answer is “no”, but **I do not understand why, if a couple is completely infertil and are still copulating, why they can not have “help” uniting their sperm and egg. **

Women are allowed to use hormones to produce more eggs. Either sex may have surgeries to straighten tubes to allow eggs or sperm to pass. You may even have surgery to remove an embryo from the fallopian tube to try to save the life and have it reimplant in the uterus! I honestly see this as messing with the natural state of the body. **

**Again, I understand the rules, I’m just stating my opinion, my view. And stating that it is very hard to know the real rules when so many people “in charge” are putting their opinion before Church teachings.

I think the key difference to keep in mind is that IVF occurs outside the body and the other procedures occur within the body…with the goal in mind to allow fertilization to occur withing the body, as intended.

As has been mentioned, the concept of “frozen embryo rescue” continues to be problematic in my mind. I was at mass yesterday and saw a “snowflake baby” that was adopted by a couple on our parish. He or she (I can never tell by looking at that age) is about two months or so old. Without being rescued, this baby would have never seen the light of day.

And that’s the dilemma…whether to allow this procedure (embryo implantation) with embryos already made in order to rescue them. One one hand, inaction dooms them. On the other, it’s morally problematic. I hope that someday that this practice would be morally approved, under strict guidelines, to rescue at least some of these frozen embryos that are otherwise doomed.

The main problem is that ivf creates many embryos, and then many of them are destroyed or fail to implant and die.

If one agrees that embryos have personhood, this is obviously unacceptable.

If there existed some ivf method which created only one embryo and which did not increase significantly the probability of his/her death compared to a natural conception… well, I do not know,** there would still be the problem of the separation between procreation and conjugal act,** but perhaps this could be acceptable if no other way existed.

It could still be a disordered act, I am not sure of that, but it would not be murder as the current forms of IVF are.

Yep.

There is no requirement to create more embryos than are implanted. A couple can arrange to only fertilize the number of eggs that will be implanted so that none are wasted or frozen for later use. As for embryos failing to implant and die, that happens with natural conceptions too

True. Multiple embryos are usually created for the sole reason of “efficiency”…financial efficiency. This procedure is costly, and most people cannot afford to have it done repeatedly for one embryo a pop.

 

[ccpoisonivy]

I’m sure it has been posted, but I’ve missed it somewhere. Does anyone have the specific sections/verses of the bible that the Church based their decision from? I want it for my own personal reference, not really for arguement.

I struggle with the fact that a couple has to have physical sex to produce a baby. Why, if the couple is unable to produce eggs and/or sperm, can’t they have help? It is just as an artificial heart would help one live while waiting on a transplant? That it is beating outside the body, and I know you will say it is sustaining life not creating it, but it is not natural regardless.

Also, I am all for embryo adoption. There has been NO formal ruling on this as of yet and I can not see how they (the Church) can say the rescue and attempt at giving a full life to one of these children could EVER be immoral. That may be a breaking point for me, personally, if that is ever seen as immoral/sin.

I know that there are hospitals that will do a mass harvest of eggs, like sperm, and then only unite 3 at a time, implant all 3, and let God take it from there. That way there is not a frozen embryo, ever.

Finally, to say that waiting for an acceptable way to allow infertile couples to carry and have their own children is like waiting for murder to be ok is a little over the top, in my opinion. There have been ideas and “rulings” of the Church that have been overturned in the past. Faith, Hope, and Love. Remember that. We have to keep the hope and faith that the Church will find an “acceptable” way for this to happen scientifically without any “sin” in their eyes.

For me, this part of the Church’s teachings is like learning about evolution (Big Bang) in school. I had to memorize the “correct” information and spit it back out on the test, but I do not have to agree with it. I am allowed to think my own opinion, and hope that the creators of the test one day see what I do.

 

[techboy22]

Did anyone catch this story in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal:

online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703493504576007774155273928.html

 

[nodito]

I struggle with the fact that a couple has to have physical sex to produce a baby. Why, if the couple is unable to produce eggs and/or sperm, can’t they have help?

A couple who is having medical issues that make it difficult for them to have a baby can have help. The man can take vitamins or medications to help increase sperm count or mobility. The woman could licitly make use of any therapies which would help her ovulate more regularly or maximize mucus production. They can attend NFP classes to learn about the menstrual cycle and try to optimally time their intercourse. They can treat infertility like the disease that it is and avail themselves of any medical techniques which attempt to address it. Nevertheless, it is within the body of the woman that conception must take place, following an act of intercourse with her husband.

And why is this? The Church reminds the faithful that the only real rights belong to the child, and that every child has the right be conceived from the act of a loving marital union. It’s a radical idea that secular society doesn’t quite grasp; after all, who can remember their conception? But God’s design for marriage and procreation is such that He wants the physical expression of love between the husband and wife to be the means for creating new life. Sex is, in fact, the most profound reflection of God’s love for us; a man and wife give themselves to each other freely, fully, and faithfully, permanently, and it is this complete self-donation that brings forth new life. Every child deserves to be the product of that loving conjugal act. Of course, the child who is conceived by rape, or out of wedlock, or from IVF, or from a dysfunctional marriage can absolutely grow up feeling loved and cared for and be well-adjusted, but this doesn’t change the fact that an injustice was done to them, even if they never realize it.

Infertility can be devastating, and my heart really goes out to couples who are suffering from it. Theirs is not an easy cross to bear, and we should do all we can to support them and encourage them. But we would do these couples and their families a great disservice by suggesting that they violate another person’s right so that they can fulfill their very real and virtuous desire to parent biological children.

God bless.

 

[ccpoisonivy]

And why is this? The Church reminds the faithful that the only real rights belong to the child, and that every child has the right be conceived from the act of a loving marital union. It’s a radical idea that secular society doesn’t quite grasp; after all, who can remember their conception? But God’s design for marriage and procreation is such that He wants the physical expression of love between the husband and wife to be the means for creating new life. Sex is, in fact, the most profound reflection of God’s love for us; a man and wife give themselves to each other freely, fully, and faithfully, permanently, and it is this complete self-donation that brings forth new life. Every child deserves to be the product of that loving conjugal act. Of course, the child who is conceived by rape, or out of wedlock, or from IVF, or from a dysfunctional marriage can absolutely grow up feeling loved and cared for and be well-adjusted, but this doesn’t change the fact that an injustice was done to them, even if they never realize it.

Infertility can be devastating, and my heart really goes out to couples who are suffering from it. Theirs is not an easy cross to bear, and we should do all we can to support them and encourage them. But we would do these couples and their families a great disservice by suggesting that they violate another person’s right so that they can fulfill their very real and virtuous desire to parent biological children.
God bless.

I read what you have written, and others have said the same thing. All I ask is where is the passage from the bible stating that you may not do IVF? Every church has their own doctrine, and within that, their own rules and interpretations of what God wants from us. I want to know where the Church got the information to decide that a medical procedure to help a LOVING couple, who are still able to have intercourse, but not concieve, is against His desires. I want to clarify something for you as well - a couple who has IVF can have the same love, if not more, than a couple who conceives from intercourse. I actually take a mild insult that you believe an “injustice” was done to any child born out of wedlock, etc. That is a personal opinion of yours, not the Church’s. I also do not understand what you mean by “another person’s” right is violated when IVF is used. The right to create children rests with God and God alone.

I know that the Church says no, and if I want to remain within good standing with the Church, I should not go against their teachings. I also know that I will meet many amazing Buddist, Hindu, Protestant, and Jewish (etc) people in Heaven, and this is not what many believe either. Our God is an all powerful and all forgiving God. I just can not wrap my mind around Him not wanting good people to have children. I need, for my own peace of mind, to see where exactly the Church found the teaching to create the rules involving IVF.

Can anyone point this out to me? I’m really struggling here.

 

[davidv]

I read what you have written, and others have said the same thing. All I ask is where is the passage from the bible stating that you may not do IVF? Every church has their own doctrine, and within that, their own rules and interpretations of what God wants from us. I want to know where the Church got the information to decide that a medical procedure to help a LOVING couple, who are still able to have intercourse, but not concieve, is against His desires. I want to clarify something for you as well - a couple who has IVF can have the same love, if not more, than a couple who conceives from intercourse. I actually take a mild insult that you believe an “injustice” was done to any child born out of wedlock, etc. That is a personal opinion of yours, not the Church’s. I also do not understand what you mean by “another person’s” right is violated when IVF is used. The right to create children rests with God and God alone.

I know that the Church says no, and if I want to remain within good standing with the Church, I should not go against their teachings. I also know that I will meet many amazing Buddist, Hindu, Protestant, and Jewish (etc) people in Heaven, and this is not what many believe either. Our God is an all powerful and all forgiving God. I just can not wrap my mind around Him not wanting good people to have children. I need, for my own peace of mind, to see where exactly the Church found the teaching to create the rules involving IVF.

Can anyone point this out to me? I’m really struggling here.

The Churches teaching regarding the proper use of ones sexuality and the bringing new life in the form of children is based on Jesus’ words, “in the beginning…God made them male and female…”. Pope John Paul II expounds on this in his Wednesday audiences beginning September 5, 1979. These talks are assembled in the book The Theology of the Body. They are also available on the Vatican website.