IVF

[ndeparis88]

Hey everyone. I haven’t been on for a while and I thought that this issue that came up with me would be a good thing to talk about.

I know as a Catholic I should frown upon invitro fertilization. I feel like when I take a step back and think how do I feel as me on the subject, I invariably come to a conundrum. I have a link about an article I read online about this women who went through so many things just to get pregnant, and I know she really wanted one, and I know I should be proud when couples want to bring life into the world. But I remember my allegiance. I don’t feel it is right to condemn this woman, I don’t believe that is my job. Also I’m a young adult and my audience is highly secularized and are all for this. Also when responding please respond with kindness. a lot of my audience and fellow young adults, will strike at any way they can to condemn the Faith, don’t give them ammo.

slate.com/slideshows/double_x/infertility.html

 

[Trishie]

You are right, not our place to condemn.

It’s difficult, for to have a child is a gift of God, a *privilege *not a right,
but it’s easy to say that when someone desperately wants a child.

I know someone who is going through IVF.
She explained that any embryos “not used will be destroyed”, which is to say, tiny human beings. She’s a generally kind person who is upset over cruelty to people and to animals, but she doesn’t see these tiny human lives as defensible. “Just blobs of tissue”, she said
You see the issue though, there is another but this is the most serious one.

Where others do push through and use IVF we are saddened on several levels, for the woman or couple, for the little humans who are ‘left over and discarded’, but welcome the baby the priest assured me.

Catholic teaching on IVF, from three priests

theword.ie/cms/publish/printer_396.shtml

catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml

cloudoffire.blogspot.com/2009/02/in-vitro-fertilization-ivf-and-catholic.html

 

[Newbie2]

Hey everyone. I haven’t been on for a while and I thought that this issue that came up with me would be a good thing to talk about.

I know as a Catholic I should frown upon invitro fertilization. I feel like when I take a step back and think how do I feel as me on the subject, I invariably come to a conundrum. I have a link about an article I read online about this women who went through so many things just to get pregnant, and I know she really wanted one, and I know I should be proud when couples want to bring life into the world. But I remember my allegiance. I don’t feel it is right to condemn this woman, I don’t believe that is my job. Also I’m a young adult and my audience is highly secularized and are all for this. Also when responding please respond with kindness. a lot of my audience and fellow young adults, will strike at any way they can to condemn the Faith, don’t give them ammo.

slate.com/slideshows/double_x/infertility.html

Catholics are not allowed to use conundrums…oh, wait. Never mind.

But seriously, yeah, not our job to condemn. We have to learn to pick our battles, I guess.

 

[Nate13]

We should be angry with the people who put such temptation in the path of these women who so desperately want a child. We should equally be angry at those who provide abortions for women and counsel them to such courses in their times of weakness.

 

[ndeparis88]

I can’t help but be saddened, by this lack of love. We go through so much to play God, and we try so hard to solve the equation to the human condition and invariably we always fail because we don’t live in Christ. In the end we still Want and want, we push and we push and yet we still don’t see, we still are not satisfied.

 

[LaSainte]

I personally think there is a lot of ego involved with someone who would go to such lengths and expense just to pass on their own genetic material when so many children are rotting in orphanages all over the world. There are babies in Romania who will never be held or snuggled, who are only touched when it is time to feed them or change their diapers, who exhibit self-harming behavior by slamming their heads against the crib and who don’t cry because they know it won’t do any good. If you can afford IVF, you can afford to fly to Romania and adopt one of these poor little ones. So sad

 

[quiet52]

The end does not justify the means.
We don’t kill babies in order to give birth to one.

Also, the reproductive technologies reject the unitive aspect of God’s gift of sex.

 

[thistle]

Hey everyone. I haven’t been on for a while and I thought that this issue that came up with me would be a good thing to talk about.

I know as a Catholic I should frown upon invitro fertilization. I feel like when I take a step back and think how do I feel as me on the subject, I invariably come to a conundrum. I have a link about an article I read online about this women who went through so many things just to get pregnant, and I know she really wanted one, and I know I should be proud when couples want to bring life into the world. But I remember my allegiance. I don’t feel it is right to condemn this woman, I don’t believe that is my job. Also I’m a young adult and my audience is highly secularized and are all for this. Also when responding please respond with kindness. a lot of my audience and fellow young adults, will strike at any way they can to condemn the Faith, don’t give them ammo.

slate.com/slideshows/double_x/infertility.html

The official Church position on IVF can be found in Dignitas Personae (see link below)

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081212_sintesi-dignitas-personae_en.html

Extract from DP:

In vitro fertilization and the deliberate destruction of embryos

The experience of recent years has shown that in all techniques of in vitro fertilization “the number of embryos sacrificed is extremely high” (n. 14). Even in the most technically advanced centers of artificial fertilization, the number is above 80% (cf. footnote 27). “Embryos produced in vitro which have defects are directly discarded”; a increasing number of couples “are using artificial means of procreation in order to engage in genetic selection of their offspring”; of the embryos which are produced in vitro “some are transferred into the woman’s uterus, while the others are frozen”; the technique of multiple transfer in which “the number of embryos transferred is greater than the single child desired, in the expectation that some embryos will be lost… implies a purely utilitarian treatment of embryos” (n. 15).

“The blithe acceptance of the enormous number of abortions involved in the process of in vitro fertilization vividly illustrates how the replacement of the conjugal act by a technical procedure…leads to a weakening of the respect owed to every human being. Recognition of such respect is, on the other hand, promoted by the intimacy of husband and wife nourished by married love… In the face of this manipulation of the human being in his or her embryonic state, it needs to be repeated that God’s love does not differentiate between the newly conceived infant still in his or her mother’s womb and the child or young person, or the adult and the elderly person. God does not distinguish between them because he sees an impression of his own image and likeness… Therefore, the Magisterium of the Church has constantly proclaimed the sacred and inviolable character of every human life from its conception until its natural end” (n. 16).

 

[ndeparis88]

I personally think there is a lot of ego involved with someone who would go to such lengths and expense just to pass on their own genetic material when so many children are rotting in orphanages all over the world. There are babies in Romania who will never be held or snuggled, who are only touched when it is time to feed them or change their diapers, who exhibit self-harming behavior by slamming their heads against the crib and who don’t cry because they know it won’t do any good. If you can afford IVF, you can afford to fly to Romania and adopt one of these poor little ones. So sad

I was thinking along the same lines. There was just a lot that was selfish. I mean when she said the only decision her husband had to make was which porn movie to watch. I mean what about him. I mean isn’t it detaching to not be able to love you wife fully because your using your hand instead of using the right means. Plus there is the adoption thing. I know that in the end it worked, but what’s the price? I mean yeah the child should be here and stuff but still.

 

[severus68]

I personally think there is a lot of ego involved with someone who would go to such lengths and expense just to pass on their own genetic material when so many children are rotting in orphanages all over the world. There are babies in Romania who will never be held or snuggled, who are only touched when it is time to feed them or change their diapers, who exhibit self-harming behavior by slamming their heads against the crib and who don’t cry because they know it won’t do any good. If you can afford IVF, you can afford to fly to Romania and adopt one of these poor little ones. So sad

I agree. I also wish more Catholics would adopt orphans when they want large families and not just want their biological children.

 

[severus68]

The official Church position on IVF can be found in Dignitas Personae (see link below)

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081212_sintesi-dignitas-personae_en.html

Extract from DP:

In vitro fertilization and the deliberate destruction of embryos

The experience of recent years has shown that in all techniques of in vitro fertilization “the number of embryos sacrificed is extremely high” (n. 14). Even in the most technically advanced centers of artificial fertilization, the number is above 80% (cf. footnote 27). “Embryos produced in vitro which have defects are directly discarded”; a increasing number of couples “are using artificial means of procreation in order to engage in genetic selection of their offspring”; of the embryos which are produced in vitro “some are transferred into the woman’s uterus, while the others are frozen”; the technique of multiple transfer in which “the number of embryos transferred is greater than the single child desired, in the expectation that some embryos will be lost… implies a purely utilitarian treatment of embryos” (n. 15).

“The blithe acceptance of the enormous number of abortions involved in the process of in vitro fertilization vividly illustrates how the replacement of the conjugal act by a technical procedure…leads to a weakening of the respect owed to every human being. Recognition of such respect is, on the other hand, promoted by the intimacy of husband and wife nourished by married love… In the face of this manipulation of the human being in his or her embryonic state, it needs to be repeated that God’s love does not differentiate between the newly conceived infant still in his or her mother’s womb and the child or young person, or the adult and the elderly person. God does not distinguish between them because he sees an impression of his own image and likeness… Therefore, the Magisterium of the Church has constantly proclaimed the sacred and inviolable character of every human life from its conception until its natural end” (n. 16).

I am confused. I know of those who implant all of the embryos and some keep the rest for future implantation. I also do not understand why the absence of the conjugal act is wrong in this case. So avowed Catholics like Celine Dion committed a great sin twice? To be honest, I only realised IVF is prohibited rather recently. While I accept that is the Church’s position, I cannot understand the reasoning where no baby is killed.

 

[Rence]

I am confused. I know of those who implant all of the embryos and some keep the rest for future implantation. I also do not understand why the absence of the conjugal act is wrong in this case. So avowed Catholics like Celine Dion committed a great sin twice? To be honest, I only realised IVF is prohibited rather recently. While I accept that is the Church’s position, I cannot understand the reasoning where no baby is killed.

Even if the exact number of eggs fertilized is the exact number of fertilized eggs implanted, without any waste or freezing, the Church still forbids it. The Church forbids it because it requires the ‘unitive’ property of marriage to be present (in other words, the natural marital embrace has to be present). Even if the husband is the one who actually does the implanting, the Church still forbids it because it’s not ‘natural’. Remember that in order for sex (and conception) to be licit according to Church rules, two properties have to be present 1) unitive and 2) procreative between a married couple. They forbid IVF for the same reason they forbid artificial contraception (because it interferes with the unitive property). Hope that helps…

 

[Am2010]

I personally think there is a lot of ego involved with someone who would go to such lengths and expense just to pass on their own genetic material when so many children are rotting in orphanages all over the world. There are babies in Romania who will never be held or snuggled, who are only touched when it is time to feed them or change their diapers, who exhibit self-harming behavior by slamming their heads against the crib and who don’t cry because they know it won’t do any good. If you can afford IVF, you can afford to fly to Romania and adopt one of these poor little ones. So sad

The international adoption program in Romania has been closed since 2008. They now only allow grandparents of the orphan to adopt.

 

[severus68]

Even if the exact number of eggs fertilized is the exact number of fertilized eggs implanted, without any waste or freezing, the Church still forbids it. The Church forbids it because it requires the ‘unitive’ property of marriage to be present (in other words, the natural marital embrace has to be present). Even if the husband is the one who actually does the implanting, the Church still forbids it because it’s not ‘natural’. Remember that in order for sex (and conception) to be licit according to Church rules, two properties have to be present 1) unitive and 2) procreative between a married couple. They forbid IVF for the same reason they forbid artificial contraception (because it interferes with the unitive property). Hope that helps…

Thanks Rence. It is the ‘not natural’ thing that gets to me. Surgery, implants are all not ‘natural’. I know about the unitive and creative requirements for sex but I still dont understand how it applies here. I must be missing something. Adoption is expensive.

 

[LaSainte]

The international adoption program in Romania has been closed since 2008. They now only allow grandparents of the orphan to adopt.

The same applies to countries all over the world. Orphanages are over-crowded and babies are left in cribs all day and night with no hope of adoption, let alone the occasional snuggle. It makes me so sad that someone would spend a hundred thousand dollars just to carry on their own DNA when there are children who are alive right now who need parents so badly.

 

[Rence]

Thanks Rence. It is the ‘not natural’ thing that gets to me. Surgery, implants are all not ‘natural’. I know about the unitive and creative requirements for sex but I still dont understand how it applies here. I must be missing something. Adoption is expensive.

Yeah, I don’t get the “not natural” either, but that’s Church teaching. Feeding tubes and sawing open someone’s chest is hardly “natural”, neither are drugs that preserve people’s lives well beyond their mental and physical function either, but they are allowed by the Church. Nor are life support systems that families can insist keep a patient “alive” indefinitely.

I don’t understand it at all, but those are the rules. I’m glad that people who are not constricted by the rules can enjoy the priviledge of having children though. Every child is a blessing and for those couples who have used it, I’m sure they are beyond grateful to God for the technology available.

 

[Rence]

The same applies to countries all over the world. Orphanages are over-crowded and babies are left in cribs all day and night with no hope of adoption, let alone the occasional snuggle. It makes me so sad that someone would spend a hundred thousand dollars just to carry on their own DNA when there are children who are alive right now who need parents so badly.

Yeah, but they make it so difficult that a lot of peope choose IVF instead.

 

[Catholic_GirlUK]

The prime minister in the UK recently stated that IVF is something we have to be proud of which I strongly disagree with. I would never condemn someone for having fertility treatment as I do not have the right to pass judgement. I fully understand that couples may have a deep longing for a biological child, God places that longing in individuals but life and fertility is a gift. If I were in such a situation I would probably want to do all I could to have a child of my own but could never live with having played a part in the destruction of embryos. Seeking to bring life into the world through artificial methods is an attempt to play God and takes away the love that should be integral to the creation of new life. I think some people fail to see that the ‘spare embryos’ are human lives, if you are to take the view that life starts at the moment of conception, which I strongly believe it does. It all seems so clinical, It saddens me that the ‘spare’ embryos are just discarded, thus overlooking the sanctity of life. It is tough as I know of people who were born as a result of IVF and their life is as much a gift and as sacred any others, but fundamentally I do not feel it should be used as a solution for creating life, it’s causes life to be treated as a commodity and is just another example of humans playing God. I agree that adoption is a possibility, there are so many children in need of a loving family who can bring just as much joy to a couples life. Being adopted myself I am acutely aware that I could easily have been aborted and thankful that I was put up for adoption which then gave my parents the opportunity to have a child without using IVF.

 

[Nate13]

Thanks Rence. It is the ‘not natural’ thing that gets to me. Surgery, implants are all not ‘natural’. I know about the unitive and creative requirements for sex but I still dont understand how it applies here. I must be missing something. Adoption is expensive.

I wouldn’t think of it as being wrong because its “not natural” but rather because “its against our nature” or “against the purpose for which we were created”. Then the questions who need answers to is how do we know what our nature truly is and why is it important that we pay heed to it? To prevent turning this into another natural law thread, I’ll just leave it at that and advise you to search the CAF forum on natural law.

 

[severus68]

I wouldn’t think of it as being wrong because its “not natural” but rather because “its against our nature” or “against the purpose for which we were created”. Then the questions who need answers to is how do we know what our nature truly is and why is it important that we pay heed to it? To prevent turning this into another natural law thread, I’ll just leave it at that and advise you to search the CAF forum on natural law.

Thank you. I have thought and read about this for awhile.