On Abortion and IVF

[vz71]

VZ 71 you say, “I read the previous post, and what struck me was the I’s all over it. I suffered this, I believe that, I etc…
What about God?

I am sorry for the suffering that has been wrought by the unspeakable acts of your childhood, but that is not sufficient reason to discard God’s word.”

While I hear the words “sorry for your suffering” in your post – they seem more than a bit empty…. At first it deeply affected me – your cavalier attitude – but now I realize you don’t know me – don’t owe me a thing…. You ask what about God? So let me tell you a thing or two that I know about God. Forgive me for the use of “I’s” since that seems so offensive to you. (But unlike others on this site I can only speak for myself – I don’t try to speak for Him).

Ouch.
Perhaps you need a reminder. You do not know me as well.
Far from attempting to speak for God, I am speaking based on the known teachings of God. IVF is simply not a licit means of conceiving a child. This does not mean your child was a mistake at all. It simply means that the method used in the conception was not licit, and therefore can be considered sinful.
As to how sinful, that would depend on your knowledge of the circumstance among other things.
“I’s” are not offensive to me. But the I placed before the teachings of God’s church, placed before God’s will, are offensive.

As I lay on the cement floor of that basement at the age of 7 knowing that this monster was going to kill me – I felt scared. But I did not feel forsaken. My clarity of thought was amazing – I felt God with me but knew that if I was going to survive I needed to save myself and that’s exactly what I did (and then testified to put the monster away for good). I am aware that God doesn’t ALLOW bad things to happen to people and I also am clear that no one is entitled a child. But faced with the crisis of infertility (and it IS a life crisis) I knew one thing for sure – God was with me but I needed to seek out a way to help myself. I feel as if I have stayed within the confines of HIS teachings. I am keenly aware that you do not feel the same.

You simply may not know the extent of the teachings on IVF.
Perhaps you received some bad advise from a church official.
It happens. I once had a high school priest lay claim that we all should be given condoms before the prom as it was a known fact that high school students could not control themselves.
It was a singular learning experience. That priests do not necessarily know the correct church teaching…or worse, they do and choose to subvert it.

To say what we did was wrong would be like saying she was a mistake – and she was nothing of the sort. I will happily explain it to her … the alternative (never having her and thus never having to explain it) would be too heartbreaking to imagine. I find it shameful that you feel as if you can judge me so critically. There is only one true judge … and I am clear that I will not have to “front up to God”…

No one has said your daughter was a mistake.
As to ‘too heartbreaking to imagine’ there are always alternatives.
Perhaps God had you lined up for some other blessing…one ‘too wonderful to imagine.’

“The Catholic Church is very clear that life begins at the moment of conception. In 1974, the Pope wrote in the Document on Procured Abortion:- “From the time that the ovum is fertilized a new life is begun which is neither that of the father or the mother. It is the life of a new human being with its own growth. It would never become a human if it were not human already.” The Church is therefore against any procedure which creates spare embryos that are later destroyed or experimented upon. Any created embryos should have the status of a human. To deliberately destroy or experiment upon an embryo in this way is very wrong. Therefore, the Catholic Church can support the use of Artificial Insemination which does not create spare embryos. IVF however, is an acceptable practice if only the number of eggs are fertilized which are to be replaced in the mother. We cannot support creating spare embryos which are later destroyed. Life begins at conception and we must respect that as we develop new techniques of helping people like yourselves.”
Sincerely, Father Don Tdoit

Your priest is mistaken.
He is quoting teaching on stem cell research and attempting to apply it to IVF. They are not the same, and should not be used interchangeably. He should instead be referring to the teachings on IVF.

Given that it appears you went out of your way to get documentation from your priest on the circumstance beforehand, I imagine a great deal of the culpability lies with him.

 

[Michael96]

I’d like to see IVF performed by just fertilising the number of eggs that will be implanted at the time. I know for many this would still fall short of the ideal, but for many others it would be an acceptable procedure.

 

[kyria]

I’d like to see IVF performed by just fertilising the number of eggs that will be implanted at the time. I know for many this would still fall short of the ideal, but for many others it would be an acceptable procedure.

That is still playing God Michael96. We don’t always know why God gives children to some and not to others, but he has his reasons and I believe messing with God’s reasons isn’t a very good idea.

 

[Michael96]

Well, to some extent all medicine (such as the use of drugs to stimulate ovulation, which are approved of by the church) might be classed as “playing God”.

Father Don Tdoit’s advice seems good to me. Different people will hold different views on when we are working “with God” and when we may be working “against God”, but it seems to me that Father Don Tdoit cut to the critical point which is to preserve and value life.

Thank God we didn’t need IVF, but I would have been comfortable using IVF that did not generate “spare” embryos. That is obviously just a personal opinion, and I realise my view falls short of the “council of perfection” that the Church officially teaches.

 

[vz71]

Father Don Tdoit’s advice seems good to me. Different people will hold different views on when we are working “with God” and when we may be working “against God”, but it seems to me that Father Don Tdoit cut to the critical point which is to preserve and value life.

But he did abandon the church teaching.

I find it very tough to reconcile"VF however, is an acceptable practice if only the number of eggs are fertilized which are to be replaced in the mother."

with"the Church remain opposed from the moral point of view to homologous ‘in vitro’ fertilization. Such fertilization is in itself illicit and in opposition to the dignity of procreation and of the conjugal union, even when everything is done to avoid the death of the human embryo."
At the very least he is handing out bad advise.

 

[sabla01]

Thank you all for your response. I do need to quickly say: Father Tdoit is not my priest just someone I sought out for more guidance.

Kyria - I know that IVF, to you and others, are outside the church’s teaching. I am NOT trying to rationalize WHY I did it. I am telling you HOW we did it. My husband and I have kept the utmost respect for the human life(ves) we have created.

Despite any misgivings you may have - All I am saying (and why I posted my initial comment in the first place) is this: Don’t compare what I did to abortion. They are not even close to being the same thing.

 

[vz71]

They are not even close to being the same thing.

What happens to those that are not implanted?

How is abortion any different?

 

[sabla01]

As I stated in my earlier post, all 4 will be implanted. We took responsibility for each embryo as if they were already members of our family, None will be foresaken.

That’s the difference.

 

[Michael96]

I think there’s a huge difference between abortion and IVF where all the embyos are treated as viable life (and will be implanted).

Indeed, that not just different, but are complete opposite. IVF (where all embyos have an opportunity for life) is part of a culture of life. Abortion is part of a culture of death.

 

[fix]

I think there’s a huge difference between abortion and IVF where all the embyos are treated as viable life (and will be implanted).

Indeed, that not just different, but are complete opposite. IVF (where all embyos have an opportunity for life) is part of a culture of life. Abortion is part of a culture of death.

If the technology replaces the marital act that is not part of the culture of life.

Some place in this thread someone linked to the Vatcian statement about these technologies and they outline quite well the moral reasoning involved. I have not seen anyone here refute it.

 

[vz71]

As I stated in my earlier post, all 4 will be implanted. We took responsibility for each embryo as if they were already members of our family, None will be foresaken.

That’s the difference.

Then you have, in fact, been able to seperate out the act of abortion from the IVF you participate in.

I can concede the point in this particular instance.

However, the church law has still been violated.
While not the same sin as abortion, IVF is still a sin.

 

[Michael96]

If the technology replaces the marital act that is not part of the culture of life.

I agree. It should not replace the marital act. I have a suspician though that those using IVF will still carry on with the marital act.

Some place in this thread someone linked to the Vatcian statement about these technologies and they outline quite well the moral reasoning involved. I have not seen anyone here refute it.

It seems to me once you remove abortion from IVF then the discussion over what methods are allowed to assist fertilisation is at an entirely different level and is well within the bounds of personal conscience to apply.

Anyway I’ve had my say on this topic. God bless you all.

 

[vz71]

Indeed, that not just different, but are complete opposite. IVF (where all embyos have an opportunity for life) is part of a culture of life. Abortion is part of a culture of death.

But it reduces the act of love to a surgical procedure.
This runs contrary to church law, doesn’t it?

 

[fix]

I agree. It should not replace the marital act. I have a suspician though that those using IVF will still carry on with the marital act.

How is IVF not replacing the act? Where is fertilization happening? It is called in vitro for a reason.

It seems to me once you remove abortion from IVF then the discussion over what methods are allowed to assist fertilisation is at an entirely different level and is well within the bounds of personal conscience to apply.

The magisterium disagrees with you though.

This is from that link mentioned before:

It would on the one hand be illusory to claim that scientific research and its applications are morally neutral; on the other hand one cannot derive criteria for guidance from mere technical efficiency, from research’s possible usefulness to some at the expense of others, or, worse still, from prevailing ideologies. Thus science and technology require, for their own intrinsic meaning, an unconditional respect for the fundamental criteria of the moral law: that is to say, they must be at the service of the human person, of his inalienable rights and his true and integral good according to the design and will of God.(7)

No biologist or doctor can reasonably claim, by virtue of his scientific competence, to be able to decide on people’s origin and destiny. This norm must be applied in a particular way in the field of sexuality and procreation, in which man and woman actualize the fundamental values of love and life. God, who is love and life, has inscribed in man and woman the vocation to share in a special way in his mystery of personal communion and in his work as Creator and Father.(12) For this reason marriage possesses specific goods and values in its union and in procreation which cannot be likened to those existing in lower forms of life. Such values and meanings are of the personal order and determine from the moral point of view the meaning and limits of artificial interventions on procreation and on the origin of human life.

“The transmission of human life is entrusted by nature to a personal and conscious act and as such is subject to the all-holy laws of God: immutable and inviolable laws which must be recognized and observed. For this reason one cannot use means and follow methods which could be licit in the transmission of the life of plants and animals”

Advances in technology have now made it possible to procreate apart from sexual relations through the meeting in vitro of the germ-cells previously taken from the man and the woman. But what is technically possible is not for that very reason morally admissible.
(15)

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Why is it that people who have undergone IVF always accuse those of us who are opposed to it (because the CATHOLIC CHURCH’S OFFICIAL TEACHING IS AGAINST IT. You can argue all you want, the Church opposes it, just like contraception, abortion, and “same sex marriage”, and it will NEVER change, no matter what some priests might try to tell you) of believing their children are a “mistake” or, worse yet “not loved by God”, when we believe no such thing?

My 20 y/o daughter was conceived when I was 16 years old, through an act of (completely consensual) fornication. Was she a mistake? NO. Is she a gift from God and completely loved by Him? ABSOLUTELY YES! Did I sin in having sex outside of marriage at the age of 16 at the time she was conceived? OF COURSE I DID! One (the sin) has nothing to do with the other (the child). It’s the same thing with IVF.

Oh, and btw, Sabla, your daughter was not conceived when she was implanted in your womb, she was conceived when the sperm and egg came together in the petri dish. That’s another lie the medical industry and secular society try to feed us, that “conception” = “implantation”. That’s not true. Life begins when sperm and egg meet (whether in the fallopian tubes or in the lab).

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[rlg94086]

As I stated in my earlier post, all 4 will be implanted. We took responsibility for each embryo as if they were already members of our family, None will be foresaken.

That’s the difference.

Yes and no, sabla01. I agree with your statement that your case is not the same as abortion (the purposeful killing of an unborn child). However, when you say “we took responsiblity” that is not 100% accurate:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html

Homologous IVF and ET is brought about outside the bodies of the couple through actions of third parties whose competence and technical activity determine the success of the procedure. Such fertilization 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.

In other words, some lives* may* have been lost due to the procedure itself. From your earlier post:

sabla01:

During the IVF, 10 embryos (babies) were created. The first time 3 were implanted. But – we did not acheive a pregnancy. The other 7 were frozen. We went back. We were told that there were only 2 really good embryos left and that we should implant those and forget the rest. We, of course, adamantly refused this. So they implanted 3 embryos (1 they considered “good” and 2 that they felt would not make it) and happily we conceived our daughter this time.

The babies that didn’t survive the procedure may have survived if conceived through a natural conjugal act. We don’t know, of course, as miscarriages occur in natural births, as well. However, even the method of freezing the baby puts his/her life in peril. The Church is teaching here that entrusting the life process into the hands of technology is contrary to our dignity.

 

[sabla01]

ALL GIRLS -

I searched through my posts to try to find one where I said or even hinted that conception didn’t occur until implantation. I can’t find this anywhere - if you felt this was my position, I apologize. I absolutely agree with you that the embryo (uniting of sperm and egg) is conception and it is a baby from that point on. I’m sorry if something I said led you to believe that I felt otherwise.

 

[Catherine555]

The babies that didn’t survive the procedure may have survived if conceived through a natural conjugal act. We don’t know, of course, as miscarriages occur in natural births, as well. However, even the method of freezing the baby puts his/her life in peril. The Church is teaching here that entrusting the life process into the hands of technology is contrary to our dignity.

We entrust much of the life process in to the hands of technology. Women get ultrasounds that have not been proven safe. Women also take meds that they need when again they have not been proven safe. These things have not been proven safe because what pregnant woman would want to volunteer their unborn child for a drug trial, not very many I’m sure. But many women make the personal choice to have tests done, uses pharmaceuticals, thus entrusting their child’s life and well being to technology. How exactly is this different than IVF?

I imagine the difference is you might say that with IVF the conception is not longer in utero. That’s what I think bugs our pontiff. But I often view the uterus as the outside of my body. Instead of holding my child in my hand, I through evolution, have found a better spot to carry my child. The only real physical connection we have is through the umbilical cord. I argue that my egg really left my body when I ovulated just as sperm left my husband’s body when he ejaculated. For most babies conception occurs in a tube, for others in a dish. But both IVF and traditionally conceived babies would have loving parents and born from a loving mother. I think that’s what really matters here. I would even say IVF parents maybe more enthusiastic about these children because of the hard road they have traveled.

I’m 34, just diagnosed with endometriosis. Just learned our only daughter is a miracle baby. And it will take a second miracle to conceive her sibling. The specialist recommends IVF. I will continue reading to see if I can find an answer to tell her no I won’t do it but haven’t found one yet. My daughter will make a great big sister. I think she should look at a tiny baby brother or sister and see a reflection of herself. And when I die I hope she will have a piece of me with her in the form of a sibling. I want to give her this.

 

[Biggie]

I’m 34, just diagnosed with endometriosis. Just learned our only daughter is a miracle baby. And it will take a second miracle to conceive her sibling. The specialist recommends IVF. I will continue reading to see if I can find an answer to tell her no I won’t do it but haven’t found one yet. My daughter will make a great big sister. I think she should look at a tiny baby brother or sister and see a reflection of herself. And when I die I hope she will have a piece of me with her in the form of a sibling. I want to give her this.

Please see my post earlier. This was my daughter’s situation with no children. “A piece” of yourself can come in many forms. And isn’t it marvellous to leave the world a legacy also? Who knows what God intends to work in us?

 

[Catherine555]

Please see my post earlier. This was my daughter’s situation with no children. “A piece” of yourself can come in many forms. And isn’t it marvellous to leave the world a legacy also? Who knows what God intends to work in us?

Hi Biggie,

I’m one of 12 children. I’m kind of partial to the piece of yourself that is flesh and blood. Just a personal preference I see. I’ll read your earlier post tomorrow. Bedtime.

I have endured man trials and what God has worked from them for me is a compassion for others who suffer as myself. Done. I have much compassion for woman who have fertility issues.