In vitro fertilisation

The moral difficulties

Working on the assumption that we are talking about IVF between a married couple, we can identify some key problems with the technique. Homologous IVF (which involves only the married couple) is morally unacceptable, because it separates procreation from the context of the sexual act. Heterologous IVF (which involves the donation of sperm or ovum from a person other than the couple and perhaps too a surrogate mother, who carries the child to term on behalf of the legal mother) is gravely immoral for the same reasons but also because it infringes the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him or her, bound by marriage.

Other difficulties arise from these issues. First, the sperm would normally be collected through masturbation, an act which is immoral since it is contrary to the purpose of the sexual organ to derive sexual pleasure outside the context of the marital act. Secondly, in practice while many embryos are created from this process, only one is implanted in the uterus. Many embryos are thus destroyed in the process of finding the “suitable” embryo. Other embryos are frozen and stored indefinitely, or until they too are destroyed. The difficulty here is that a fertilised egg – however fertilisation is achieved – is a human being. Embryos therefore cannot be created on the assumption that they are just a “blob of cells” and so able to be destroyed with no consequence. Thirdly, there could be psychological issues arising from IVF. In an extreme case, there could be three people claiming to be the child’s mother (the biological mother (who gave the egg), the surrogate mother (who carried the child to term in her uterus) and the legal mother (who brings the child up) ) and two claiming to be the child’s father (the biological father (who gave the sperm) and the legal father). The identity of the child is thus put at risk right from the start.

The realistic (and cheaper) alternatives

No-one denies that the difficulties arising from infertility can cause immense heartache. There are two things to consider here. First, a child is a gift, not a product, even of a well-intentioned scientific process. Being a gift, a child is never anyone’s “right”. Instead, a child (even a child at the embryo stage) is a subject with rights too. In IVF, those rights, particularly the right to be born of parents in a natural way, are completely violated. They are also taken away if the embryo is terminated in the process of finding a ‘suitable’ type. Secondly, there are in fact some fantastic techniques for achieving fertility that are completely safe, natural, cheap and moral. For example, so-called “NaPro Technology” treats infertility and assists couples to avoid pregnancy. The difference between “NaPro” – which stands for “natural procreative technology” – and IVF is marked by the fact that IVF involves the creation of embryos in a laboratory which are then implanted into the uterus. If the embryos begin to grow, one or more are almost always aborted. Unused embryos are frozen and stored. NaPro does not involve the creation, abortion or storing of embryos. With NaPro, women use a specially designed method to track their cycles and find the underlying causes of their infertility. The doctor then prescribes either medical treatment or surgery aimed at making conception possible.

For more information about in vitro fertilisation, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church 2376-2377.