Religion And Spirituality Question Put Up For Discussion: "Are IVF Children An Abomination?"
'Test tube babies': God's work or human error?
by Cathy Lynn Grossman
Do you think a baby conceived in test tube is still a child in the eyes -- or mind or hands, depending on your theology/philosophy -- of God? Does the science behind this merit the Nobel Prize for Medicine or condemnation in the realm of faith and ethics?I'm starting out with the questions today because the impact of the Nobel Prize for Medicine going to the doctor who developed in vitro fertilization is still rumbling around the world.
The Vatican has already denounced the prize going to British scientist Robert Edwards, for work that led to the birth of the first test-tube baby, Louise Brown, 32 years ago.
As USA TODAY's medical writer Rita Rubin points out, some thought Catholic oppostion to reproductive technology and Edwards' own self-described views as a socialist may have delayed the honor for decades.
At The Washington Post, Rob Stein looked into the ramifications of Edwards' work which, "gave humanity the power to do what previously was considered the province of God: create and manipulate human life."
Arthur Caplan, a University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, told Stein:
In exploring the fundamental mechanisms of how human reproduction actually works, Edwards unleashed a social, ethical and cultural tsunami that he could not have predicted and I don't think anyone at the time could have anticipated
... The implications are just staggering. Even some of the arguments about gay marriage spin out from the fact that IVF lets gay people have children.
Rev. Thomas Berg, director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person, a Catholic bioethics think tank told Stein,
I would argue that IVF technology opened a door to a kind of control over human lives. Upon reflection now three decades later, I think we're seeing the very dark consequences of this.
That's exactly the direction the Vatican went in detailing its "disappointment" with the commodification of conception.
According to the Times Live
The Vatican's top medical ethics official, Ignacio Carrasco de Paula, already criticized the decision in comments on Monday that blamed Edwards for creating a market in embryos and failing to protect human life.
Without Edwards, there would not be a market on which millions of ovocytes are sold, and there would not be a large number of freezers filled with embryos in the world... In the best of cases they are transferred into a uterus but most probably they will end up abandoned or dead, which is a problem for which the Nobel Prize winner is responsible.
So, back to our questions:
Do you think a baby conceived in test tube is still a child in the eyes of God? Does the science behind this merit a Nobel Prize, or ethical condemnation? And what about the parents? Is their IVF choice selfish or loving? Are they creators -- or merely shoppers?
Personally I think it's utterly sick that they've even decided to ask this question and the views expressed on IVF by the Vatican here are very saddening, not least because they are unsurprising.
The way this "pro-life" position seems to work is that if a woman doesn't feel ready to be a parent she should be forced to, even if the child is a product of being raped by their own father. Meanwhile if a couple chooses to use scientific progress to deal with issues like blocked fallopian tubes and the like and become parents, their offspring is not really a child "in the eyes of God" and is in fact an "error". Might I add that there are now millions of children (and adults) which are here being declared to be "errors".
(Source)
Also there's some interesting opinion pieces from scientist PZ Myers on how stupid this all is:
here and here.
by Cathy Lynn Grossman
Do you think a baby conceived in test tube is still a child in the eyes -- or mind or hands, depending on your theology/philosophy -- of God? Does the science behind this merit the Nobel Prize for Medicine or condemnation in the realm of faith and ethics?I'm starting out with the questions today because the impact of the Nobel Prize for Medicine going to the doctor who developed in vitro fertilization is still rumbling around the world.
The Vatican has already denounced the prize going to British scientist Robert Edwards, for work that led to the birth of the first test-tube baby, Louise Brown, 32 years ago.
As USA TODAY's medical writer Rita Rubin points out, some thought Catholic oppostion to reproductive technology and Edwards' own self-described views as a socialist may have delayed the honor for decades.
At The Washington Post, Rob Stein looked into the ramifications of Edwards' work which, "gave humanity the power to do what previously was considered the province of God: create and manipulate human life."
Arthur Caplan, a University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, told Stein:
In exploring the fundamental mechanisms of how human reproduction actually works, Edwards unleashed a social, ethical and cultural tsunami that he could not have predicted and I don't think anyone at the time could have anticipated
... The implications are just staggering. Even some of the arguments about gay marriage spin out from the fact that IVF lets gay people have children.
Rev. Thomas Berg, director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person, a Catholic bioethics think tank told Stein,
I would argue that IVF technology opened a door to a kind of control over human lives. Upon reflection now three decades later, I think we're seeing the very dark consequences of this.
That's exactly the direction the Vatican went in detailing its "disappointment" with the commodification of conception.
According to the Times Live
The Vatican's top medical ethics official, Ignacio Carrasco de Paula, already criticized the decision in comments on Monday that blamed Edwards for creating a market in embryos and failing to protect human life.
Without Edwards, there would not be a market on which millions of ovocytes are sold, and there would not be a large number of freezers filled with embryos in the world... In the best of cases they are transferred into a uterus but most probably they will end up abandoned or dead, which is a problem for which the Nobel Prize winner is responsible.
So, back to our questions:
Do you think a baby conceived in test tube is still a child in the eyes of God? Does the science behind this merit a Nobel Prize, or ethical condemnation? And what about the parents? Is their IVF choice selfish or loving? Are they creators -- or merely shoppers?
Personally I think it's utterly sick that they've even decided to ask this question and the views expressed on IVF by the Vatican here are very saddening, not least because they are unsurprising.
The way this "pro-life" position seems to work is that if a woman doesn't feel ready to be a parent she should be forced to, even if the child is a product of being raped by their own father. Meanwhile if a couple chooses to use scientific progress to deal with issues like blocked fallopian tubes and the like and become parents, their offspring is not really a child "in the eyes of God" and is in fact an "error". Might I add that there are now millions of children (and adults) which are here being declared to be "errors".
(Source)
Also there's some interesting opinion pieces from scientist PZ Myers on how stupid this all is:
here and here.