Miscarriages and Research

[Moscati]

I have a question:

Could it possibly be morally permissible to donate the remains of a naturally and spontaneously miscarried fetus for scientific research?

I understand the Church’s stance on stem cells (I think . . . please correct me if I’m wrong) is derived from its prohibition of abortion. The vast majority of research stem cells come from (or were derived from at some point from) elective abortions, which are considered to be gravely immoral, of course.

What if, however, the stem cells came instead from a tragic accident? And the parents were willing to donate them?

I know that Catholics are allowed to donate their bodies after death for medical research/training (it’s something I’d always wanted to do, so I checked up on it). Pope John Paul II called that and organ donation noble and charitable. Is the donation of miscarried fetal tissue fundamentally different?

A caveat: I’m not sure if this is even possible (I don’t know much about stem cell research), or how it would work–it’s a purely theoretical question.

Thoughts?

 

[Ferds_Guiang]

I think there’s a lot of debatable issues here. While I believe organ donation is moral I have my reservations about using cadavers simply for research. Not to mention the fact that some researches could not be totally neutral or amoral. We have to know the nature of the research. My opinion is that the body is sacred and just because the fetus or cadaver could no longer object doesn’t mean researchers can do as they please with it. Perhaps I’m too conservative but when the Church says that we are the temple of the Holy Spirit then even when we die, we have to give due reverence to our bodies.

 

[Jermosh]

Few things to clarify, Embryonic Stem Cells (ESCs) do not come from an abortion, they are harvested from a embryo that was fertilized in a labratory and is then killed or slowly harvested of ESCs. This is a long and tedios process with not a lot of material to do research on. The Church is against this for a few reasons, one being the killing of a human life regardless of its state and place, also there is the issue with In Vitro Fertilization which are usually a large part of where the eggs have come from, and cloning moves into this area as well. This stage of life is very young in the effect of 5-10 days, so Direct Abortion would not be part of this particular issue.

Now if the body of a miscarried body can give is Adult Stem Cells, the umbilical cord is chock full of them, there is other research as well. Giving ones organ or body for research can be a good and rewarding action, when our son died we allowed harvesting of organs and “parts”, we found some comfort in the fact that we allowed for the life of others and the ability to have sight. Every once and awhile we get a letter from the agency telling us about some of the lives that are being changed.

With this in mind, ASCs are certainly moral and have been far more productive at cures and therapy. In fact they are finding that they can be made to act the same as ESCs and with the fact that they are so plentiful they can have lots more material to study and research with.

 

[hamburglar]

From my understanding, the Church teaches that cadavers may be used for research purposes, provided they are given a proper burial.

If a child dies from a miscarriage, then that is a natural death. If the “research” done on the remains is done for sound reasons, it would seem that it would be permissible.

However, the child cannot consent to his or her body being used for “research” and so I would probably say that it would not be permissible because of this reason.

 

[Doc_Keele]

My understanding from my recent fairly intensive reading is that it’s OK if it’s a miscarriage and there’s no commercial element.

 

[Moscati]

Few things to clarify, Embryonic Stem Cells (ESCs) do not come from an abortion, they are harvested from a embryo that was fertilized in a labratory and is then killed or slowly harvested of ESCs. This is a long and tedios process with not a lot of material to do research on. The Church is against this for a few reasons, one being the killing of a human life regardless of its state and place, also there is the issue with In Vitro Fertilization which are usually a large part of where the eggs have come from, and cloning moves into this area as well. This stage of life is very young in the effect of 5-10 days, so Direct Abortion would not be part of this particular issue.

Thank you very much for your clarification! I had heard that it was customary for clinics to ask those pursuing a direct, elective abortion if they wished to donate the remains for research, and I assumed that was another source of embryonic stem cells (in addition to IVF). I think what they harvest in that case must actually be considered “adult” stem cells, since the baby would be older than 5-10 days.

 

[Moscati]

From my understanding, the Church teaches that cadavers may be used for research purposes, provided they are given a proper burial.

If a child dies from a miscarriage, then that is a natural death. If the “research” done on the remains is done for sound reasons, it would seem that it would be permissible.

However, the child cannot consent to his or her body being used for “research” and so I would probably say that it would not be permissible because of this reason.

That is my understanding of cadaver research too. Most of the time, the body is no longer intact enough to be returned as is, though, so families receive the ashes, which can then be properly interred.

I think, though, that a child’s parents, by virtue of their role as parents, could give consent for their child’s body to be used for research (as Jermosh did). They can bless their children and require their obedience by virtue of that role–would this be different?