Human begins, like every other God’s
creatures; desired to reproduce its kind. Many spouse conceived without any
difficulty, while some have trouble conceiving a child. Childless couples
usually seek medical help. Science has offered and continues to offer many
glittering solutions to everyday problems, such as in vitro fertilization to solve childlessness. However, the
benefits that science offered are intertwined. In other words, to every
scientific solution, there are at least two ethical problems. This paper
explains potential dangers posed to human dignity through the use of in vitro fertilization (IVF). It also
discusses the need to look towards moral theology for profound solutions to
everyday problems, rather than depending solely on philosophy. In particular,
in vitro fertilization undermines the dignity of the embryo. It turns procreation
into manufacture. The work of two philosophers, Leon R. Kass’s Life, Liberty and the Defense of Dignity:
The challenge for bioethics and Anthony Fisher’s Catholic Bioethics for a New Millennium, will help us to understand
this concept better.
There are many ethical questions
concerning in vitro fertilization.
For instance: When does life begin? What constitute a human being? Does the
embryo has the same rights and dignity as fully developed human begins? To
answer these questions, we need to look at choice make at every stage of in vitro fertilization. As medicine
advances, the answers to these questions also change. Many people usually see ethical
issues, such as in vitro fertilization, as a matter of right and wrong, good
and evil, benefits and harms. What is at stake is the idea of the humanness of
our human life and the meaning of our embodiment, our sexual being, and our
relation to ancestors and descendants. Instead of asking if the issue is moral
or immoral; people should try first to fully understand the meaning and
significance of the proposed actions.”[1]
Life begins at fertilization. As Kass
wrote, “The zygote, early embryonic stages are clearly alive because they
metabolize, respire and respond to changes in the environment; they grow and
divide. …Once fertilization is complete, there exists a new individual, with
unique genetic identity, fully potent for the self-initiated development into a
mature human being, if circumstances are cooperative. …It possesses a power to
become what everyone will agree is a human being.”[2]
To maximize the effectiveness of the IVF
process, several eggs has to be fertilized and implanted at the same time in
the womb in the hope that some will survive. As Kass writes, “Current procedures to initiate pregnancy
with laboratory fertilization thus differ from the natural process in that what
would normally be spread over four or five months in vivo is compressed into a single effort, using all at once a four
or five months’ supply of eggs.” [3] In
the case where two or more survived in the womb, then there is issue with
selective reduction to ensure that other babies have better chance of surviving
and less treat to the mother.
Then there is a problem of what happens to
the embryos that are not implanted in the womb? What should be done to them? Destruction,
storage, use in research, implantation donation to third-party couples? These
are some practices that trigger the question of human dignity. When human
begins become creators, they first create and then wonder what to do next. They
are unwilling to assume responsibilities for what result from their choice.
So many fetus at the stage of embryo
development have been interrupted because the experimental conditions of their in- vitro culture, of the selection
practiced on them, and their non-transfer to the uterus. This developing human in vitro deserve our respect not because
it has rights or claims, but because of what it is, now and prospectively.
Therefore, failure to implant it is homicide.[4]
Those who are in support of in vitro
fertilization may argued that the natural loss of embryos in early
pregnancy cannot in itself be a warrant
for deliberately aborting them or for invasively experimenting on them in vitro, any more than stillbirths could
be a justification for newborn infanticide.[5]
There are questions of using the embryos
for experiment or as Kass rightly said, “What about experimentation on such
blastocysts and early embryos? Is that compatible with the respect they
deserve?... Invasive and manipulative experiments involving such embryos very
likely presume that they are things or mere stuff and deny the fact of their
possible viability.” [6]
There is no different from someone who deliberately procure abortion and a
scientist who intentionally carry out selective reduction or other experiment
of the embryo in the laboratory.
Human desire for mastering the mystery of
birth has led us to reducing humanness to mere body. We constantly range
against the virtues of piety, humility and temperance because we are
overwhelmed by our desire to master and control. As Kass said, “Our society is
dangerously close to losing its grip on the meaning of some fundamental aspects
of human existence. In reviewing the problem of the disrespect shown to embryonic
and fetal life in our efforts to master them, we noted a tendency to reduce
certain aspects of humanness to mere body, a tendency opposed most decisively
in the nearly universal prohibition of cannibalism.”[7]
Human beings are composed of body, mind and spirit. Lying emphasize only on
physical aspect of our being is like appreciating parts more than a whole.
In vitro fertilization does not only
dehumanize the fetus, but is also reduces a profound gift of procreation –
co-creators with God – into manufacture. The couples are no more than suppliers
of raw materials to a scientist to produce a child. As Kass noted, “It is also
to deny the meaning of the bonds among sexuality, love and procreation. They
buying and selling of human flesh and the dehumanized uses of human body ought
not to be encouraged.”[8]
The potential human life that is so
precious and unique is subject to different kind of manipulations. Our society
is becoming more and harsher. As Kass noted, “It is hard to claim respect for
human life in the laboratory in a society that does not respect human life in
the womb. It is hard to talk about the meaning of sexuality and embodiment in a
culture that treats sex increasingly as sport and has trivialized gender,
marriage and procreation…. It is hard to speak about restrain in a culture that
seems to venerate very little above man’s own attempt to master all.”[9]The
use of human embryo, has led to a culture where they are regarded as
commodities rather than the precious individuals which they are.
The latest scientific advances in health
care and fertilization bring with them promising new horizons, but not without
vice. There are many questions that seek answers. However, depending solely on
philosophy, we cannot get too far. We need theology to enlighten us in order to
cultivate virtue. Virtue will help us to respect the dignity of human life. As
Fisher noted, “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept
of existence, of meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life.”[10]
There is an urgent need to cultivate
virtues. Virtues help us to organize our misguided passion. They are source of
inner strength that every human being needs to be truly happy. For instance,
the virtue of temperance gives order and balance to human life. When there is
an order, then we can enjoy good things in life, while respecting our natural
limits. Another virtue that we need is humility. Humility enables us to know
our limitations, and accept it as God’s gift. A childless couples who have
tried conceiving but with no success will accept their fate and use that energy
creatively in bringing about God’s kingdom by helping others. God planned that human life can only be
initiated legitimately through natural conjugal act between spouses. “These techniques can enable man to
take the temptation to go beyond the limits of a reasonable dominion over
nature.”[11]
IVF might constitute progress in the service of humanity, but it also involves
serious moral risks. The Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith writes:
From
the moment of conception, the life of every human being is to be respected in
an absolute way because man is the only creature on earth that God has wished
for himself, and the spiritual soul of each man is immediately created by God;
his whole being bears the image of the creator. Human life is sacred because
from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains
forever in a special relationship with its creator, who is its sole end. God
alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can, in any
circumstance, claim for himself the right to destroy an innocent human being.
Human procreation requires on the part of the spouses responsible collaboration
with the fruitful love of God; the gift of human life must be actualized in
marriage through the specific and exclusive acts of husband and wife, in
accordance with the laws inscribed in their persons and in their union.[12]
God created each of us secretly in silence
and without the knowledge of anyone, not even the mother, It is now been
reduced to creative designed of human intelligence. As Kass said, “With in
vitro fertilization, the human embryo emerges for the first time from the
natural darkness and privacy of its mother’s womb, where it is hidden away in mystery,
into the bright light and utter publicity of the scientist’s laboratory, where
it will be treated with unswerving rationality, before the clever and shameless
eye of the mind and beneath the obedient and equally clever touch of the hand.”[13]
In conclusion, respect for the beginning
of human life and the dignity of human procreation are too scared to be turned
into commodity and manufacturing. The
primacy of the protection and promotion of human life and of the dignity of the
human person cannot be compared with scientific and technological progress. Every
human being has dignity because we are created in the image and likeness of
God. Therefore, dignity exists from the earliest moment of conception to the
new human being and remains with them to their natural death. Therefore, not
everything that is scientifically brilliant, or clinically possible, or legally
permitted is good.
[1] Leon R. Kass, Life, Liberty and the defense of Dignity: The
Challenge for Bioethics. San Francisco. Encounter Books, 2002. 85
[2] Kass., 87 - 88
[3] Kass., 92
[4] Kass., 89
[5] Kass 92
[6] Kass., 93
[7] Kass., 99
[8] Kass., 101
[9] Kass., 115
[10] Anthony Fisher, Catholic Bioethics
for a New Millennium. Cambridge, University press, 2012. 21.
[11] Pope John Paul II, 1980.
[12] Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith, 1988.
[13] Kass., 116
No comments:
Post a Comment