IVF

[sarahj26]

I came across on another message board group people talking about Embryonic Stem Cell Research…They said the only people who could really be against it are people against IVF.

I said I was against IVF and people were shocked! I mean they said they had never heard anyone against IVF, etc. I practice NFP and am going on my 6th child, they said I would feel differently if I couldn’t have children,etc…

How do you handle this when people act this way. I would also think if more Catholics were against birth control and IVF and IUI that more people would not be shocked at this. That is what disturbes me also, people who say they are Catholic and don’t practice or even know what to believe…anyways, just want to know what you think??

 

[rpp]

The Catholic Church teaches that In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is immoral on several fronts.

Lots of fertilized embryos (aka: BABIES; PEOPLE) are created that are never implanted in the mother.

When implantation is done, many embryos (read: BABIES; PEOPLE) are implanted to increase the odd that at least one will survive.

Many times, all the embryos (think: BABIES; PEOPLE) die. Other times too many survive and begin to multiply. Then doctors council the mother to abort (KILL) all but one or two of babies.

What is done with the unimplanted embryos (remember: BABIES; PEOPLE)? They are either frozen, and often destroyed (KILLED) later or are destroyed (KILLED) after pregnancy is achieved.

So if you think an abortion mill kills a lot of people, they have nothing on a fertility clinic that provides IVF services.

 

[mapleoak]

The Catholic Church teaches that In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is immoral on several fronts.

Lots of fertilized embryos (aka: BABIES; PEOPLE) are created that are never implanted in the mother.

When implantation is done, many embryos (read: BABIES; PEOPLE) are implanted to increase the odd that at least one will survive.

Many times, all the embryos (think: BABIES; PEOPLE) die. Other times too many survive and begin to multiply. Then doctors council the mother to abort (KILL) all but one or two of babies.

What is done with the unimplanted embryos (remember: BABIES; PEOPLE)? They are either frozen, and often destroyed (KILLED) later or are destroyed (KILLED) after pregnancy is achieved.

In addition to all these evils resulting from IVF, the Church also teaches that IVF in and of itself is an intrinsic evil. It is an affront to the sacred nature of the procreative act.

 

[LittleDeb]

Yep IVF is another sad result of the contraception mentality, also known as “entitlement.”

Since people have found it fine to seek unity at the expense of procreation (contraception) they have also found it fine to seek procreation at the expense of unity (IVF). The Church teaches that procreation is primary and unity flows secondary from that.

I have struggled with infertility. None of us is entitled to have babies. I have personally watched numerous marriages fall apart as they spent thousands of dollars for their “right” to have a baby. So sad.

IVF doesn’t build families. It tears them apart and makes children an accessory.

 

[rpp]

In addition to all these evils resulting from IVF, the Church also teaches that IVF in and of itself is an intrinsic evil. It is an affront to the sacred nature of the procreative act.

Thank you. I missed that. That is so true!

Yep IVF is another sad result of the contraception mentality, also known as “entitlement.”

** Since people have found it fine to seek unity at the expense of procreation (contraception) they have also found it fine to seek procreation at the expense of unity (IVF).** The Church teaches that procreation is primary and unity flows secondary from that.

I have struggled with infertility. None of us is entitled to have babies. I have personally watched numerous marriages fall apart as they spent thousands of dollars for their “right” to have a baby. So sad.

IVF doesn’t build families. It tears them apart and makes children an accessory.

(Emphasis mine.)

What an excellent observation. This is true on so many levels.

On a personal note, I am sorry to hear of your personal struggles. It can only imagine how painful and frustrating it is.

May God grant you His peace.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

…How do you handle this when people act this way…

usually rather than say “I am …” I say “The Catholic Church has some interesting teachings on that subject have you studied those?” When that does not work I wait until they speak of the down side. “~Like we spent $100,000 and all we do is cry ourselves to sleep” I reply “Maybe that is why the Church teaches what it teaches, have you had a chance to read that yet."

 

[SeekerJen]

I said I was against IVF and people were shocked! I mean they said they had never heard anyone against IVF, etc. I practice NFP and am going on my 6th child, they said I would feel differently if I couldn’t have children,etc…

Well, I can’t have children, and I’m still against IVF. I think it’s immoral and irresponsible. Who are we, to insist that we must physically bear our own genetic offspring? Who are we to insist that it is our right to condemn our unused offspring to physical limbo in liquid nitrogen tanks? Heck- even the term “unused” implies that our children are “things” that can be “used”, rather than individual humans who are precious in their own rights.

Pregnancy and childbirth is not a right, it is a gift. We are not all so gifted. That doesn’t mean that we should seize it for ourselves in unnatural ways.

I understand that adoption is a pain in the bum. I’m not looking forward to that. It’s unbelievably frustrating to me that a couple of 16-year-olds can spend 15 minutes in the backseat of a car and become parents and that some women have three or four children by different fathers by the time they are 20. It kills me that so many women get pregnant so easily- through birth control and during one-night stands- and then abort those babies. My husband and I will possibly have to shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars in legal and travel fees, put up with intrusive home visits and have background checks to make sure that we are fit parents, and after all of that, the baby may still be taken away from us after we have him or her at our home. It’s not fair. But it still doesn’t excuse immorality.

 

[LittleDeb]

Well, I can’t have children, and I’m still against IVF. I think it’s immoral and irresponsible. Who are we, to insist that we must physically bear our own genetic offspring? Who are we to insist that it is our right to condemn our unused offspring to physical limbo in liquid nitrogen tanks? Heck- even the term “unused” implies that our children are “things” that can be “used”, rather than individual humans who are precious in their own rights.

Pregnancy and childbirth is not a right, it is a gift. We are not all so gifted. That doesn’t mean that we should seize it for ourselves in unnatural ways.

I understand that adoption is a pain in the bum. I’m not looking forward to that. It’s unbelievably frustrating to me that a couple of 16-year-olds can spend 15 minutes in the backseat of a car and become parents and that some women have three or four children by different fathers by the time they are 20. It kills me that so many women get pregnant so easily- through birth control and during one-night stands- and then abort those babies. My husband and I will possibly have to shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars in legal and travel fees, put up with intrusive home visits and have background checks to make sure that we are fit parents, and after all of that, the baby may still be taken away from us after we have him or her at our home. It’s not fair. But it still doesn’t excuse immorality.

Oh Jen, you said this so incredibly well!!

My heart goes out to you yet again. What a beautiful voice you are on such a difficult subject! Praying for you… a Hail Mary for intercession of course an Our Father, and a Glory Be, to boot.

 

[Tracyms1974]

I would suggest the next time you run into some of these closed minded people who think that IVF is so great, suggest to them that adoption is always a readily-available option. Even if a couple doesn’t have the money to go to an agency and adopt a baby, there are foster kids who would love to be loved - even for a while. IVF is really unnecessary because there are kids already here. I agree with other posters who say that having a baby isn’t a right, it’s God’s providence. For whatever reason, if a woman is not fertile, it is, unfortunately, her (and her husband’s) cross to bear. But be glad that adoption and foster care are there to provide opportunities for such couples to be parents.

Tracy

 

[Gisella]

I would suggest the next time you run into some of these closed minded people who think that IVF is so great, suggest to them that adoption is always a readily-available option. Even if a couple doesn’t have the money to go to an agency and adopt a baby, there are foster kids who would love to be loved - even for a while. IVF is really unnecessary because there are kids already here. I agree with other posters who say that having a baby isn’t a right, it’s God’s providence. For whatever reason, if a woman is not fertile, it is, unfortunately, her (and her husband’s) cross to bear. But be glad that adoption and foster care are there to provide opportunities for such couples to be parents.

Tracy

Actually, there are waiting lists to adopt. It’s not so easy. I don’t think this is the best argument.

 

[LittleDeb]

Actually, there are waiting lists to adopt. It’s not so easy. I don’t think this is the best argument.

Well… not quite true. There are waiting lists to adopt healthy, white, baby boys. Then there are shorter lists for girls. Bi-racial and non-Caucasian babies can often be adopted by the time the paperwork and home visits are done. Numerous friends of mine have filed and adopted in less than 9 months.

Of course, older children are usually available immediately.

 

[Gisella]

That really surprises me that there is a longer waiting list for boys. I would’ve thought it would be just the opposite. I know that 75% of American couples seeking gender selection want a girl, so I thought it would be similar for adoption.

 

[ribozyme]

That really surprises me that there is a longer waiting list for boys. I would’ve thought it would be just the opposite. I know that 75% of American couples seeking gender selection want a girl, so I thought it would be similar for adoption.

That’s odd, I thought there was a greater preference for males.

But if you think IVF is quite prevalent now… just wait.

From a Randall Parker:

The development of increasingly more powerful genetic tests for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PIGD or PGD) of embryos will lead prospective parents to become much more selective in choosing embryos. As the significance of more genetic variations becomes known people will have far more reasons to choose between different embryos. The trend is going to be toward the creation of far larger numbers of embryos so as to increase the odds of finding an embryo will be found that contains the best combination of genes from the two parents. Basically, people will throw the genetic dice more times in order to better their odds.

futurepundit.com/archives/004889.html

Catholics will have an uphill battle. The pro-life movement will be routed soon. I have my own concerns about the technology, and I am primarily concerned about the potential (detrimental) effects of its price on its application especially its effects in countries with a high gini coefficient (i.e. income inequality). This is diverges from the concern of most people here.

 

[hasikelee]

I just read in the newspaper about scientists attempting to maniuplate cells into both eggs and sperm, effectively making humans asexual. This is for the purpose of giving offspring the same genetics.

The comment in the article was “If scientists are successful, then they will have overcome the ONLY objection to gay and lesbian marriage, that is, not being able to procreate.”

I immediately thought of the Catholic Church and its stance against IVF. Guess they still have another “objection” to overcome.

 

[Gisella]

That’s odd, I thought there was a greater preference for males.

But if you think IVF is quite prevalent now… just wait.

From a Randall Parker:

futurepundit.com/archives/004889.html

Catholics will have an uphill battle. The pro-life movement will be routed soon. I have my own concerns about the technology, and I am primarily concerned about the potential (detrimental) effects of its price on its application especially its effects in countries with a high gini coefficient (i.e. income inequality). This is diverges from the concern of most people here.

This article adresses fears about it becoming the norm and harming society:
reason.com/news/show/34895.html

I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with gender selection if it were natural and didn’t involve the destruction of embryos of the other gender. For example, if a specific diet around conception or certain position increased the odds of conceiving a girl or boy I don’t think it would be a big deal.

 

[LittleDeb]

I honestly wouldn’t have a problem with gender selection if it were natural and didn’t involve the destruction of embryos of the other gender. For example, if a specific diet around conception or certain position increased the odds of conceiving a girl or boy I don’t think it would be a big deal.

I generally agree with you here. I do have one deeper concern.

The concern would be that what a couple naturally get is still the “wrong” one and therefore resented. There is the old wives tale about xy sperm being stronger swimmers but xx live longer. There has been success in sex selection by timing coitus either with ovulation or slightly before.

While it wouldn’t seem to be immoral to attempt sex selection naturally, there is still that horrible specter of perceived control. We get who we get. If an xx is the stronger swimmer but a couple wanted an xy, will the couple reject that child as “wrong” rather than ‘not my will but thine?’

That problem is inherently built into IVF. Sperm and eggs have no free will. God can guide them without interfering with free will. But in IVF they are specifically chosen by someone with free will. God will not interfere. IVF is all about ‘choosing the strongest.’ Whether it is about the largest egg and the strongest sperm at conception, or the weakest fetus targeted for “reduction,” it is all about trying to take control and weeding out the ‘undesirables.’

As I said, I generally agree with everything you stated. I just worry about the slippery slope of perceived control.

 

[LittleDeb]

I just read in the newspaper about scientists attempting to maniuplate cells into both eggs and sperm, effectively making humans asexual. This is for the purpose of giving offspring the same genetics.

The comment in the article was “If scientists are successful, then they will have overcome the ONLY objection to gay and lesbian marriage, that is, not being able to procreate.”

I immediately thought of the Catholic Church and its stance against IVF. Guess they still have another “objection” to overcome.

:bigyikes:

 

[Tracyms1974]

I just read in the newspaper about scientists attempting to maniuplate cells into both eggs and sperm, effectively making humans asexual. This is for the purpose of giving offspring the same genetics.

The comment in the article was “If scientists are successful, then they will have overcome the ONLY objection to gay and lesbian marriage, that is, not being able to procreate.”

I immediately thought of the Catholic Church and its stance against IVF. Guess they still have another “objection” to overcome.

Why in the world would anyone want to eliminate sex? Excuse my bluntness, and I know there are priests and nuns who are doing just fine without it, but really! That’s like trying to eliminate chocolate. Imagine never having chocolate again, ever. These people are crazy. Besides, I asked my husband about planting some cherry trees in the yard and he said that not only are they expensive, but you would also need to buy two - a male and a female. So answer me this - if plants need male and female parts to make themselves work, what makes these idiots believe that they could eliminate that process from the human being - a much more complicated and intricate organism? Duh!

Tracy

 

[Tracyms1974]

Well… not quite true. There are waiting lists to adopt healthy, white, baby boys. Then there are shorter lists for girls. Bi-racial and non-Caucasian babies can often be adopted by the time the paperwork and home visits are done. Numerous friends of mine have filed and adopted in less than 9 months.

Of course, older children are usually available immediately.

Thank you kindly! No one is forcing adoptive parents to be picky. They can be as picky (or not) as they want. Plus, I did suggest foster care. In fact, foster care may be a good way for adoptive parents to get used to the idea of being parents instead of diving right into the responsibility straightaway. Foster care is also a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” sort of thing. The DSS dept. will work harder to find a permament placement for a couple who has helped them in the past. I would imagine that’s how it is.

Tracy

 

[hasikelee]

Why in the world would anyone want to eliminate sex? Excuse my bluntness, and I know there are priests and nuns who are doing just fine without it, but really! That’s like trying to eliminate chocolate. Imagine never having chocolate again, ever. These people are crazy. Besides, I asked my husband about planting some cherry trees in the yard and he said that not only are they expensive, but you would also need to buy two - a male and a female. So answer me this - if plants need male and female parts to make themselves work, what makes these idiots believe that they could eliminate that process from the human being - a much more complicated and intricate organism? Duh!

Tracy

Well, what I gathered from the article is that this research was being done primarily for homosexual partners who wanted to have children from their own genetic pool, without adoption or surrogate mothering.

I am assuming they wouldn’t have much to complain about as they’ve already given up conjugal sex.

I do understand what you’re saying about the cherry trees. It seem so, I dunno, “dirty” or “undignified” to do this. Asexual organisms are some of the lowest life forms in the living world.