Progressives are all about “reproductive rights.” These mythical rights are not just about terminating life in the womb, but about putting life there any way possible. It really doesn’t matter if mass producing human life in a dish is healthy for the children that result; it is all about what the parents want. After all, the parents have a “right” to reproduce.
IVF has become human manufacturing to specifications. Make as many embryos as possible, implant more than one woman could safely carry in one pregnancy and when things work too well, just get rid of the extras with “selective reduction.”
The total disregard for human life, both of the mother and the children, is staggering.
And while other countries have regulations in place that control the fertility industry to protect women, children and families, the United States has none. Italy and Germany have laws that prohibit fertilizing more than three eggs at a time and require that any resulting embryos be transferred to their mother’s womb. Belgium only allows at single embryo be transferred in women under 36. And the UK and Canada, women under 40 are limited to 2 embryos. (Interestingly enough, Sweden has probably the most strict regulations on IVF. Single women are not allowed to get IVF in Sweden. A couple has to be married or a in stable relationship for over 2 years. Using donor eggs is prohibited and so is surrogacy.)
In the U.S. we expect the medical professionals in the fertility industry to regulate themselves. That means we have Octomom.
It is time the United States caught a clue and realize that regulating the fertility industry is not about infringing on “reproductive rights.” It is about safety. We continue to allow doctors to use vulnerable women and the children that result from IVF as guinea pigs.
A Huffington Post writer agrees. Dr. S. Lochlann Jain writes in her piece “We Must Regulate Reproductive Technology” about the dramatic increase of premature births and long term health problems that have resulted from a laissez faire fertility industry:
With the U.S. fertility industry worth an estimated three billion dollars, IVF is a major income generator for medical institutions. To generate business, fertility specialists publicize their statistics on live births rather than thriving babies. After the embryos are implanted though, these doctors walk away — too often from difficult pregnancies, ill babies, and the life-long struggles of the children and parents resulting from prematurity.
This unregulated free-market approach to fertility is nothing short of human experimentation based in financial incentive and medical hubris.
As my kids would say, “Booyah!” Thank-you Dr. Jain. I have been saying that IVF is human experimentation for years. And now someone else has said it. And at the Huffington Post no less!
Now of course the mere suggestion of regulating the fertility industry by Congress did not go over well at the HuffPo. Comments reveal that while progressive are fine with government taking over health care in general, they are not fine with the feds regulating IVF. That would be much too dangerous. Much too much governmental intrusion.
This is surreal of course because the Church has warned society for years that conceiving children in a dish is not good for them. They deserve to begin their lives from an act of love between their genetic parents and in the safety of their own mother’s womb. Anything less and their inherent dignity is compromised.
Which is why the Holy Father recently urged research into the causes of infertility so the human manufacturing of IVF would not be needed. From Catholic Culture:
Proper treatment on infertility, the Pope said, should be “most respectful of the human condition of the people involved.” He decried the current approach, dominated by “scientism and the logic of profit,” and said that the heavy promotion of in vitro fertilization is restricting research on more promising techniques.
Dr. Jain also decried the lack of respect for children and the profit motive in the fertility industry. She profoundly ended her piece with this:
Congress must regulate the number of embryos fertility specialists can transfer through IVF…. the people with the most to lose from its unregulated use are those least able to consent: the potential children produced.
It is nice to see that at least someone at the Huffington Post is moving in the right direction.
March 1, 2012 at 5:20 am
For those looking for more information on IVF and the Church, there's Ms. Taylor's blog, and things like this:
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/isnt-the-churchs-teaching-on-in-vitro-fertilization-unfair-to-couples-who-cannot-conc
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/how-can-the-church-deny-the-right-of-women-to-use-ivf-if-they-cannot-conceive-a-child
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/would-killing-a-human-conceived-in-a-test-tube-still-be-considered-murder
March 1, 2012 at 5:22 am
It is a fallacy to bring in point that some doctors say newborns aren't humans.
Your "evidence" was that you doubted the embryonic human was a kid; thus, that there are others who hold the same view of newborns is equally sound evidence.
March 1, 2012 at 9:50 pm
Hmm, not sure I should keep checking back here. I didn't say I didn't like the arguments in the CCC and I've quoted them earlier in the comments.
I have argued this based on the merits. There is a difference between a kid and a few cells together in a human life blastula—unless that blastula is ensouled.
If you believe the blastula is ensouled, then it follows correctly for you that the blastula is a kid.
If you aren't sure when the blastula is ensouled, and the fact that there are fertilized embryos that fall through without implantation leads a person considering IVF to doubt that the blastula is a kid because makes you wonder why God would co-create a soul into a blastula that wasn't willed by him to implant, then it follow that person considering IVF would not agree with you that the blastula is a kid.
If a person considers obedience to Church teaching as paramount to obeying Christ, then whether that person has doubts or not as to the blastula being a person, the person would obey and defend the Church's teaching. If this were you Foxfier I think we might have had a friendlier conversation.
I would defend both I think. I have highest respect for women, infertile couples who accept infertility as the cross they are willed and blessed to carry in following their Lord. I also have high respect, for someone that is carrying, voluntarily the cross of pursuing a family with help from ART, following their conscience illuminated by their heart and prayer life along the way. I do not have disdain for these people, even though I think, in their place I would pursue adoption, or . . . I don't know work in an orphanage or open a daycare or something as much as I love children before i would go against the teaching of the church.
Not sure why you are so hostile, or maybe it is just the way I am processing your messages. Have you been emotionally manipulated before, because I am pretty sure that is more involved than a couple of lines in a blog comment. Seems like there might be some baggage there, but maybe I'm guilty of crossing the line this time!
March 1, 2012 at 10:41 pm
I didn't say I didn't like the arguments in the CCC and I've quoted them earlier in the comments.
Where did you quote it?
You said: "The Catechism's arguments are not explicit enough to provide guidance other than NO!"
You also keep coming back to the screwy argument that, because some people of a certain age die, then it's reasonable to assume that they aren't really people.
If this were you Foxfier I think we might have had a friendlier conversation.
Doubtful. I don't agree with you, you keep doing exactly what you accuse others of, and you seem to be having an entirely different conversation anyways.
Why do you avoid making actual arguments in support of your claimed beliefs?
Why do you keep trying to make this a matter of emotion?
Why do you keep trying to change the subject?
Why do you keep trying to go on the offensive, while decrying how hostile I am?
Why don't you practice what you preach?
March 1, 2012 at 10:46 pm
(For those following along at home: blastocyst is a blastula for mammals; Britannica has a pretty good article on it, for the best price ;^p )