Embryo Adoption, on the Rise, Is Still a Moral Question Mark

Zenit.org ^ | 4-7-03

[cpforlife.org]

Embryo Adoption, on the Rise, Is Still a Moral Question Mark

Will It Further Institutionalize in Vitro Fertilization?

FULLERTON, California, APRIL 7, 2003 (Zenit.org).-

About 200,000 unwanted or "leftover" embryos from in vitro fertilization treatments are set to be destroyed or used for stem-cell research purposes in the United States.

However, Fullerton-based Snowflakes Embryo Adoption Program, a division of Nightlight Christian Adoptions, is using $500,000 from a $1 million federal fund approved by the Bush administration to encourage childless couples to adopt these unwanted embryos which are stored in clinics throughout the country.

Pro-abortion activists believe that the spread of these types of adoption programs will make it harder to legally dispute the right to life of even the smallest embryos.

According to Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, the idea of "adopting" embryos appeared to be laying the legal groundwork for considering embryos as human beings with full legal rights.

"If an embryo were a person with full legal rights, abortion could more easily be declared illegal," she said in an Associated Press report.

At present, embryos can be sold or donated and are considered a transfer of property. No state in America has granted legal recognition to the concept of embryo adoption; however, five states offer legal protections for the parents of adopted embryos.

While some Christian anti-abortion activists view this development as promising in the effort to save the lives of the unborn and build a culture of life, others are skeptical that it may lead to "designer" adoptions where potential parents select from "ideal" embryos.

Amid contrasting views by Catholic theologians, the Church has still not expressed an official opinion on embryo adoption. The problem is due to the inherently immoral nature of IVF procedures, which in turn have led to the creation of huge numbers of "leftover" embryos.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2377: "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.'"

Writing in the Denver Catholic Register, chastity advocate Mary Beth Bonacci explains the predicament.

"It seems to me that such an act (embryo adoption) would be moral, even morally admirable," she states. "It would be a rescue situation -- rescuing a human person from a non-life in suspended animation. It's a very pro-life thing to do.

"But here's what bothers me. I'm afraid that, if it's seen as the 'perfect solution' for infertility, it will be more likely to become the norm. If infertile couples start clamoring for fertilized eggs, it will help to further 'institutionalize' the practice of in-vitro fertilization."

Debate among Catholic theologians has centered around a 1987 instructional document, "Donum Vitae," issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

"Just to create those embryos was a grave wrong," said John Neumayr, a professor at Thomas Aquinas College, in an interview with the Lay Catholic Mission newspaper of Los Angeles. "Once they exist, however, they do exist as human beings and persons; and making the best of the situation means not destroying them -- which would be murder."

Monsignor William Smith, a noted moral theologian, wrote a 1995 article in Homiletic & Pastoral Review in which he declared that "Donum Vitae" rendered embryo adoption illicit.

"I really don't think that's a licit procedure," he said in the Lay Catholic Mission. "'Donum' Vitae didn't answer that precise question. But my judgment is negative."

According to the Telegraph newspaper of London, demand for embryo adoptions is increasing. There are now 13 women pregnant with embryo "adoptions" and Snowflakes has a list of 155 couples willing to donate embryos, and 134 ready to adopt them.

[cpforlife.org]

Please let me know if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List

[cpforlife.org]

For those who just cannot read enough!
Donum Vitae:
INSTRUCTION ON RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE IN ITS ORIGIN
AND ON THE DIGNITY OF PROCREATION
REPLIES TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS OF THE DAY

at

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html

[RLK]

I think we ought to do it the old way. One man. One woman. One commitment. Anything else brings problems beyond the limits of my simple mind.

[Notwithstanding]

A friend's academic paper on the Catholic view of this will be published soon. He presented on the topic in class today - funny that this would be in the news on the same day.

[cpforlife.org]

"I think we ought to do it the old way. One man. One woman. One commitment."

Agreed!

[Notwithstanding]

FYI: there are over 3 dozen ways to create a baby besides old fashioned love-making? It is amazing.

Up next (seriously): creating artificial sperm for IVF

[Desdemona]

ping

[skr]

I don't like the idea of petrie-dish people, but the embryos that are already here should be adoptable and not treated as property one can destroy. Then ban all the rigmarole that leads to this and start adopting the children already here.

[Coleus]

2376 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."

2377 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."

2378 A child is not something owed to one, but is a gift. The "supreme gift of marriage" is a human person. A child may not be considered a piece of property, an idea to which an alleged "right to a child" would lead. In this area, only the child possesses genuine rights: the right "to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents," and "the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception."

[hunter112]

"But here's what bothers me. I'm afraid that, if it's seen as the 'perfect solution' for infertility, it will be more likely to become the norm. If infertile couples start clamoring for fertilized eggs, it will help to further 'institutionalize' the practice of in-vitro fertilization."

Does legalized adoption of born children increase the number of out-of-wedlock pregnancies?

I think this is a specious argument. Better that those small lives go someplace wanted, rather than compounding whatever wrongdoing someone might have committed in creating them, by destroying them, or letting them go past potential viability.

[Victoria Delsoul]

But here's what bothers me. I'm afraid that, if it's seen as the 'perfect solution' for infertility, it will be more likely to become the norm. If infertile couples start clamoring for fertilized eggs, it will help to further 'institutionalize' the practice of in-vitro fertilization."

I agree. Thanks for the link as well.

[Mo1]

---

God Bless America
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER

[WaterDragon]

Interesting. A creative attack on dehumanizing the human foetus.

[HiTech RedNeck]

What's the oldest frozen embryo that has ever been successfully implanted? That is weird, for a human soul to be affixed to matter for, what, 5 years but not born yet.

Oh and another weird thought. Have any of these embryos been implanted, not in humans, but in chimps? Suppose a scientist found that would work and that a human baby could be born to a chimp. What would be the ethical implications? We say "I'll be a monkey's uncle" but could a monkey be someone's aunt???

[MrLeRoy]

Does legalized adoption of born children increase the number of out-of-wedlock pregnancies?

The act leading to out-of-wedlock pregnancy is a lot less expensive and more fun than the act leading to "leftover" embryos. But I can't see coming out against saving lives because of what it might lead other people to do.

[hocndoc]

The children exist.
They are human.
They have been created in a hazardous position - in harm's way - and virtually *anything* done to them (including doing nothing) has risk.
But, the best chance is implantation of one or two embryos into women who, along with their husbands, are willing to adopt them.

The irony is that the best chance for the children is for them to be adopted by women who have already "proven" their ability to bear children.

I would like to see more responsibility in harvesting oocytes and in the numbers of oocytes fertilized, implanted, and frozen. No more children created by IVF with the idea that there could *be* "spare" humans!

But, first, I think there needs to be more education of the public about the humanity of the embryo and of the ethics of inalienable human rights.

[elisabeth_p]

I hear that can stay frozen for 100 years. Now THAT is weird.