Surrogate motherhood

[Am2010]

Of course it’s up for debate. In my classes we debate all the time – that’s the essence of philosophy! I’m glad that *in vitro *fertilization is available for couples with intractable fertility problems. We simply have to make sure no more eggs are fertilized than will be implanted.

This is what my friend’s priest told her, as long as no life is destroyed intentionally in the process it is okay.The Dr implanted one embryo-it worked and they have a beautiful 2 year old.

 

[StAnastasia]

This is what my friend’s priest told her, as long as no life is destroyed intentionally in the process it is okay.The Dr implanted one embryo-it worked and they have a beautiful 2 year old.

I’m happy for your friend, and that she has an understanding priest. Becoming a parent is the beginning of an incomparable adventure. Blessings on your friend, her husband, and their child!

 

[Apollos]

This is what my friend’s priest told her, as long as no life is destroyed intentionally in the process it is okay.The Dr implanted one embryo-it worked and they have a beautiful 2 year old.

Unfortunately this priest’s counsel runs against natural law and Church teaching. From the Catechism (2376-77):

Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ “right to become a father and a mother only through each other.”

Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that “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.” “Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses’ union… Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person.”

Sadly, we now live in an age again when you can’t take a priest’s word for anything concerning matters of faith or morals.

 

[catharina]

This is what my friend’s priest told her, as long as no life is destroyed intentionally in the process it is okay.The Dr implanted one embryo-it worked and they have a beautiful 2 year old.

Then your ‘friend’s priest’ spoke in opposition to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

[momor]

yes, technically the priest is not in compliance but…I think priests often try to apply theology principles based on the individual in front of them and consider their unique situation and the state of mind and heart. This is a luxury the Church does not have as it must write rules that apply to everyone, all the time. Real life is rarely that black and white. I think there is an appropriate place for the priest to have this role - kind of like the judge who applies the law to each individual.

 

[catharina]

yes, technically the priest is not in compliance but…I think priests often try to apply theology principles based on the individual in front of them and consider their unique situation and the state of mind and heart. This is a luxury the Church does not have as it must write rules that apply to everyone, all the time. Real life is rarely that black and white. I think there is an appropriate place for the priest to have this role - kind of like the judge who applies the law to each individual.

In fact by virtue of his Catholic priesthood and his Catholic faith,
a priest is REQUIRED to teach and support the doctrines of the Church.

All else is wishy-washy, and feel-goodism.

 

[Newbie2]

In fact by virtue of his Catholic priesthood and his Catholic faith,
a priest is REQUIRED to teach and support the doctrines of the Church.

All else is wishy-washy, and feel-goodism.

I think that is a little harsh. Many priests have the difficult job of applying Church doctrine to real-life situations. There is not always a clear way of applying doctrine in a pastoral manner.

We have in our parish a couple who “adopted” two frozen embryos (two were implanted and they both were carried to term). Both babies were baptized last week.:dancing:
This is a slightly different scenario than what has been discussed, but a great example of where pastoral concerns and Church doctrine didn’t square. Of course in this instance the babies were rescued from certain death, as they were slated for the dumpster, not to mention that these babies were already made.

 

[catharina]

I think that is a little harsh. Many priests have the difficult job of applying Church doctrine to real-life situations. There is not always a clear way of applying doctrine in a pastoral manner.

We have in our parish a couple who “adopted” two frozen embryos (two were implanted and they both were carried to term). Both babies were baptized last week.:dancing:
This is a slightly different scenario than what has been discussed, but a great example of where pastoral concerns and Church doctrine didn’t square. Of course in this instance the babies were rescued from certain death, as they were slated for the dumpster, not to mention that these babies were already made.

FAITHFUL, not harsh at all.

I’m old enough to recall the birth of baby Louise Brown in England.
Louise Brown was the first test-tube baby know throughout the world.
After the baby was born, the (then-Pope) Holy Father John Paul I said:
“We welcome Loiuse Brown to the human family.”

GREAT example!

The Holy Father did NOT say: “Terrific. Everybody should be doing in-vitro.”
Do you appreciate the difference in attitude? I do hope so.

The post under discussion at this moment is:

Originally Posted by Am2010
“This is what my friend’s priest told her, as long as no life is destroyed intentionally in the process it is okay.The Dr implanted one embryo-it worked and they have a beautiful 2 year old.”

That's a falsehood stated by a priest.  **Not OK.**

 

[mangy_dog]

My brother has a great love for our Catholic faith. This is probably why he is very much in turmoil in trying to reconcile his (and his wife’s) intense desire to have a biological child, his recognition that the Church teaches that in vitro fertilization and surrogacy are morally wrong, and his very honest inability to believe what the church teaches or to understand WHY it teaches this. Although Donum vitae does provide an explanation, my brother cannot accept the reasoning. His justification for not following the Church’s teaching on this focuses on the good and noble end envisioned while downplaying the means to be used. He cannot see why surrogacy violates the combined unitive and procreative components that are necessary in the generation of new human life. While this seems obvious to me, I am fairly sure that his emotions are clouding his reasoning.

In many ways, I can see the difficulty that he is having from my experience at the other side of this issue (i.e. contraception). I made similar arguments before I first accepted and then warmly embraced the Church’s teaching. There are numerous excellent books, articles, and tapes that clearly and convincingly explain why contraception is wrong in separating the unitive and procreative aspects of the marital union. I was hoping that there were at least some resources available on the other side of the coin (i.e artificial reproductive technologies).

Amen

What ever happened to adoption??

And this is really where some self-examination should come into play. Do we want and love a child that God sends us or do we want a “designer child” from an intelligent and attractive father and an intelligent and attractive mother - with all the bells and whistles?

I’m sorry if this offends someone’s sensitivities but it needs to be said. There is a reason why this kind of practice goes against catholic teaching.

 

[bluerose]

What ever happened to adoption??

And this is really where some self-examination should come into play. Do we want and love a child that God sends us or do we want a “designer child” from an intelligent and attractive father and an intelligent and attractive mother - with all the bells and whistles?

I’m sorry if this offends someone’s sensitivities but it needs to be said. There is a reason why this kind of practice goes against catholic teaching.

THANK YOU for saying this!!!

You have no idea how many times I wanted to cover my son’s ears when he was growing up when people we’d meet would say, “We’re looking into trying in vitro or a surrogate, and if that doesn’t work, I guess we’ll have to adopt.” Or worse, “Well, we thought about it, but we really want a child of our own.”

God DID call us to be parents, He DID want us to have a child… and he brought us and our son’s birth mother together to accomplish that miracle. I can’t imagine missing out on the joy our son has brought us for the last 16 years just because we decided the Church “didn’t understand” and we had a “right” to have a child “of our own”.

 

[Apollos]

yes, technically the priest is not in compliance but…I think priests often try to apply theology principles based on the individual in front of them and consider their unique situation and the state of mind and heart. This is a luxury the Church does not have as it must write rules that apply to everyone, all the time. Real life is rarely that black and white. I think there is an appropriate place for the priest to have this role - kind of like the judge who applies the law to each individual.

Treating human beings like property is not a black and white issue.

 

[Apollos]

I think that is a little harsh. Many priests have the difficult job of applying Church doctrine to real-life situations. There is not always a clear way of applying doctrine in a pastoral manner.

“Pastoral” is so often a euphemism for spiritual negligence. Would you consider it harsh to excommunicate someone who makes a living out of kidnapping people and selling them into slavery? Or would that be totally different because nowadays it’s fashionable to condemn the slave trade?

 

[catharina]

THANK YOU for saying this!!!

You have no idea how many times I wanted to cover my son’s ears when he was growing up when people we’d meet would say, “We’re looking into trying in vitro or a surrogate, and if that doesn’t work, I guess we’ll have to adopt.” Or worse, “Well, we thought about it, but we really want a child of our own.”

God DID call us to be parents, He DID want us to have a child… and he brought us and our son’s birth mother together to accomplish that miracle. I can’t imagine missing out on the joy our son has brought us for the last 16 years just because we decided the Church “didn’t understand” and we had a “right” to have a child “of our own”.

Beautiful - and thank you.

 

[catharina]

Whaddaya know …
a new movie.
Name of it is “Google Baby”

"Plot: Google Baby (2009)

Google Baby offers a glimpse into the “baby production” business, an international scheme that lets American clients select genetic material from a catalogue, and have it implanted in surrogates living in India. The women are then monitored by… less

Google Baby offers a glimpse into the “baby production” business, an international scheme that lets American clients select genetic material from a catalogue, and have it implanted in surrogates living in India. The women are then monitored by international doctors for nine months, allowing the customers to receive “their” babies at the end of the gestation period. ~ Carly Wray, All Movie Guide"

Anyone surprised?
Talk about a very very very slippery slope …

 

[Rence]

We have in our parish a couple who “adopted” two frozen embryos (two were implanted and they both were carried to term). Both babies were baptized last week.:dancing:
This is a slightly different scenario than what has been discussed, but a great example of where pastoral concerns and Church doctrine didn’t square. Of course in this instance the babies were rescued from certain death, as they were slated for the dumpster, not to mention that these babies were already made.

It’s hard for me to not feel happiness in knowing that these two frozen babies were saved from the dumpster and are in a loving home. Congratulations to the new parents

 

[Newbie2]

It’s hard for me to not feel happiness in knowing that these two frozen babies were saved from the dumpster and are in a loving home. Congratulations to the new parents

You should have seen the one baby staring at the priest during the baptism. My guess is that he’ll one day become a priest as well.

“Pastoral” is so often a euphemism for spiritual negligence. Would you consider it harsh to excommunicate someone who makes a living out of kidnapping people and selling them into slavery? Or would that be totally different because nowadays it’s fashionable to condemn the slave trade?

Apples and oranges, methinks, but I do agree that “pastoral concerns” are often couched in such terms to end-around Church teachings.

I’m not certain that someone in the slave trade in such a manner is worrysome; excommunication from the Church would, methinks, be the last thing on their list of concerns. OTOH, for the couple from my parish and I’m certain many other parents wishing to adopt in a non-approved manner, excommunication would be highly problematic. In any case, excommunication isn’t done for those who have participated in IVF, is it?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I think that is a little harsh. Many priests have the difficult job of applying Church doctrine to real-life situations. There is not always a clear way of applying doctrine in a pastoral manner.

We have in our parish a couple who “adopted” two frozen embryos (two were implanted and they both were carried to term). Both babies were baptized last week.:dancing:
This is a slightly different scenario than what has been discussed, but a great example of where pastoral concerns and Church doctrine didn’t square. Of course in this instance the babies were rescued from certain death, as they were slated for the dumpster, not to mention that these babies were already made.

I think the question is still open and the Church hasn’t decided definivily…

usccb.org/comm/archives/2008/08-196.shtml

Other issues discussed in Dignitas Personae include:

Embryo adoption. The document does not reject the practice outright but warns of medical, psychological and legal problems associated with it and underscores the moral wrong of producing and freezing embryos in the first place. “Cryopreservation is incompatible with the respect owed to human embryos,” the Instruction states.

 

[Dr_Paul]

We have in our parish a couple who “adopted” two frozen embryos (two were implanted and they both were carried to term). Both babies were baptized last week.:dancing:
This is a slightly different scenario than what has been discussed, but a great example of where pastoral concerns and Church doctrine didn’t square. Of course in this instance the babies were rescued from certain death, as they were slated for the dumpster, not to mention that these babies were already made.

Making an attempt to remedy the result of a gravely immoral action is laudable but even in this circumstance, care must be made not to compound an evil by furthering another evil. I think the Church is appropriately cautious in its position on what to do with all of the human embryos that have been created by IVF. There is a concern both for these frozen human persons and for working to see that the generation of future embryos is avoided. At the moment, all potential solutions are problematic. We seem to be forced to consider “a lessor evil”.

Regarding the babies mentioned above,

"Clearly, the moral violations that occur in IVF do not reflect upon the child, who is innocent. It is not the baby’s fault in any way. The child has no control over how he or she got here. Regardless of how a baby comes into the world, whether by IVF, whether by adultery, by pre-marital sex, or even by cloning, that baby is always a gift and a blessing. The problem with IVF is not with the child, but with a decision made by the parents concerning how to pursue the satisfaction of their own desire for a child. In other words, babies, even when very much desired, should not be brought into the world by making use of disordered means such as adultery, pre-marital sex, IVF, or cloning. They should be brought into the world only within that intimate love-giving moment of the marital embrace. " Fr Tad Pacholczyk ncbcenter.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=278

 

[Apollos]

Treating human beings like property is not a black and white issue.

LOL oops, I meant, “**is **a black and white issue”

I must have been distracted by the implicit pun on black and white as races with regard to the slavery counterexample.

 

[araneae7]

I am a surrogate carrying a baby (not genetically mine) for my sister. I am not doing it for money, I am doing it for love. She is a cancer survivor (30 years) and cannot carry a child because of the effects from radiation and chemo. I am Catholic. I’ve heard all sides of the issue with regard to my faith. Ultimately, I believe that Jesus’ teaching of “love one another” applies.