After coming across another IVF horror story today, I thought this article from Christopher West would be fitting for today. Certainly we can see that there are some serious problems with IVF with regard to the hundreds of thousands of “left-over” embryos that are either destroyed, frozen for later “use,” or intentionally farmed for medical experimentation. But even if we could figure out a way to use IVF for fertility treatments without the ethical dilemma of creating extra embryos, the act of creating life outside the womb and the loving embrace of husband and wife remains contrary to the dignity of the child, the dignity of the spouses and their relationship, and Man’s status as a creature. West explains:
The dignity of the child: To seek a child as the end result of a technological procedure is to treat the child in some way as a product. For those involved, this creates – consciously, or unconsciously, subtly, or not so subtly – a depersonalized orientation towards the child. Products are subject to quality control. When you spend top dollar for a new computer, you want it in mint condition. You don’t care about the specific computer you pulled out of the box. You want one that works. If it’s defective, you’ll take it back for a refund or exchange it for another one.
Similarly, the temptation is all too real for a couple paying thousands (even tens of thousands) of dollars for these procedures to want a “refund” or an “exchange” if their “product” is defective. I don’t mean to imply that every couple who pays for these procedures stoops to this level. The temptation to apply “quality controls” can be resisted. But a depersonalizing mind-set is built-in to the very nature of the procedure.
The dignity of the spouses and their relationship: The technological generation of human life is simply not marital. In other words, the child is not the fruit of his parent’s marital union, but the product of a technological procedure performed by a third party apart from their union altogether. As a former professor of mine put it, “Spouses can no more delegate to others the privilege they have of begetting human life than they can delegate to others the right they have to engage in the marital act”(William May, Marriage: The Rock on which the Family is Built).
The marital embrace is not simply the biological transmission of gametes. It is a profoundly personal, sacramental, physical and spiritual, reality. To divorce human conception from this sublime union shows a lack of understanding of the deepest essence of married love.
Man’s status as a creature: God alone is the “Lord and Giver of Life.” Spouses have the distinct privilege of co-operating with God in pro-creating children, but, as creatures themselves, they aren’t the masters of life. They’re only the servants of God’s design. Through technological fertilization, we set ourselves up as operators instead of co-operators, creators instead of pro-creators. We deny our status as creatures and make ourselves “like God.”
Previous posts:
What DO We Do With All Those Left Over Embryos?
Another IVF Ethical Dilemma
Woman Gives Birth to Her Own Grandchildren