Today's hostile critics of the Roman Catholic Church tend
to focus
their attacks on the Church's stand vis-a-vis the
Sexual Revolution.
The Church's condemnation of pornography and solipsistic sexual gratification; of premarital intercourse; of homosexuality; of
contraception and abortion; of in vitro fertilization;
and of human embryonic
stem cell experimentation is cited as evidence that the
Church is hopelessly out of date. After all, doesn't our entire
national cultural elite
give its seal of approval to this whole program
of behaviour? Ask practically anyone at MSNBC! So why won't the
Catholic Church get on board, join the crowd, go with the flow, etc.? The reason
is that Christ's Church is guided by the Holy Spirit, "the
Spirit of Truth who will guide the Church forever to the whole
truth'" [in matters that relate to salvation]. (John, passim, chapters
14, 15 and 16). This
was Christ's promise at the Last Supper, and
Christ, the Omniscient and Almighty Son of God, keeps His promises,
even as Satan, "the liar and murderer from the beginning",
[John
8:44]
with
astute but specious reasoning will seek until the end
of time to turn us away from Christ, away from the Holy Spirit, away
from
the truth that saves. In shaping the thinking of "the world"
Satan is
strikingly successful-he "rules this world
of
darkness"
[Ephesians 6:12]
-but against the Church "the gates of hell
will not
prevail!"
[Matthew 16:18].
Sometimes scientific facts upset
the devil's schemes. For example, a recent report on a major project
involving the injection of embryonic stem cells into living subjects of
the same species (mice) revealed that the hosts' immune systems
consistently and decisively rejected these cells. Doubt is thus
cast on
the supposition that any therapeutic benefit can ever be derived from embryonic
(as contrasted with adult) stem
cells. Coming on the heels
of consistent
success in enterprises using adult stem
cells, while in
projects using (and destroying) human embryos
the score thus far is
zero, this new report undercuts the whole rationale for research
using human embryos, while it provides empirical reinforcement to the
Church's opposition to a form of research that is equatable with
murder. That's right-murder! Given that the entire DNA code
needed for the development of a human baby is already present in the
embryo, all that needs to be supplied for such development to take
place is nourishment and a safe environment. The embryo is already a
living member of the species homo sapiens. The teaching of the Church
comports with authentic science.
So, too, the Church's opposition to in
vitro fertilization seems all the more reasonable today in view of the
attention that is currently being paid to the anxiety experienced by
many who have participated in this procedure and who are now faced with
the dilemma of what
to do with the embryos that remain. A recent report
(December 4th) in the New York Times
throws a spotlight on this growing
problem.
*
*
*
* *
Parents Torn over Extra
Frozen
Embryos from Fertility Procedures
By Denise Grady
New York Times of Thursday, December 4, 2008
For nearly 15 years, Kim and Walt Best have been paying
about $200 a
year to keep nine embryos stored in a freezer at a fertility clinic at
Duke University- embryos that they no longer need, because they are
finished having children but that Ms. Best can not bear to destroy,
donate for research or'give away to another couple.
The embryos were
created by in vitro fertilization which gave the Bests a set of twins,
now 14 years old.
Although the couple who live in Brentwood, Tennessee
have known for years that they wanted no more children, deciding what
to do with the extra embryos has been a dilemma. He would have
discarded, she cannot.
"There is
no easy answer." said Ms. Best, a
nurse. "I can't look at my twins and not wonder sometimes what the
other nine would be like. I will keep them frozen for now and keep
search
in my heart."
A least 400,000 embryos are frozen at clinics around
the country, with more being added every day, and many people who are
done having children are finding it harder than they had ever expected
to decide the fate of those embryos.
A
new survey of 1,020 fertility patients at nine clinics reveals more
than a little discontent with the most common options offered by the
clinics. The survey, in which Ms. Best took part, is
being
published on Thursday in the journal Fertility
and Sterility.
Among
patients who wanted no more children, 51 percent did not want to
donate their embryos to other couples, mostly because they did
not want someone else bringing up thier children, or they did not want
their own children to worry about encountering an unknown sibling
someday.
Forty-three
percent did not want the embryos discarded. About
66 pereent said they would be likely to donate the embryos for
research, but that option was available at only four of the nine
clinics in the survey. Twenty percent said
they were likely to keep the
embryos frozen forever.
Embryos can remain viable for a decade or
more if they are frozen property but not all of them survive when they
are thawed.
Smaller
numbers of patients wished for solutions that
typically are not offered. Among them were holding a small ceremony
during the thawing and disposal of the embryos, or having them
placed
in the woman's body at a time in her cycle when she would probably
not become pregnant, so that they would die naturally.
The message from
the survey is that patients need more information, earlier in the in
vitro process, to let them know that frozen embryos may result and that
deciding what to do with them in the future "may be difficult IN
WAYS YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE," said Dr. Anne Drapkin Lyerly, the
first
author of the study and a bioethicist and associate professor of
obstetrics and gynecology at Duke University.
Dr. Lyerly also said
discussions about the embryos should be "revisited and not happen just
at the time of embryo freezing, because people's goals and their way of
thinking about embryos change as time passes and they go through
infertility treatment."
:Many couples are so desperate to have a
child that when eggs are fertilized in the clinic, they want to create
as many embryos as possible, to maximize their chances, Dr. Lyerly
said. At that time, the notion that there could be too many embryos may
seem unimaginable. (In Italy, fertility clinics are not allowed to
create more embryos than can be implanted in the uterus at one time,
specifically to avoid the ethical quandary posed by frozen embryos.)
In a previous study by Dr. Lyerly, women expressed wide-ranging views
about embryos: one called them "just another laboratory specimen," but another said
a freezer full of embryos was "like an orphanage. "
Dr. Mark V. Sauer. the director of the Center for Women's
Reproductive Care at Columbia University Medical Center in Manhattan,
said: "It's a
huge issue and the husband and wife may not be on the
same page."
Some people pay storage fees for years and years. Dr.
Sauer
said, Others stop paying and disappear, leaving the clinic to decide
whether to maintain the embryos free or to get rid of them.
"They
would rather have YOU pull the trigger on the embryos," Dr.
Sauer said. "It's like, 'I don't want to have another baby, but I don't have it in me;
I have too much guilt to tell you
what to do, to have them discarded.'"
A few patients have asked that
extra embryos be given to them, and he cooperates, Dr. Sauer said,
adding, "I don't know if they take them home and bury them."
Federa l
and state regulations have made it increasingly difficult for those who
want to donate to other couples, requiring that donors come back to the
clinic to be screened for infectious diseases, sometimes at their own
expense, Dr. Sauer said.
"It's partly reflected in the attitude of the
clinics," he said, explaining that he does not even suggest that people
give embryos to other couples anymore, where as 10 years ago many
patients did donate.
Ms.
Best said her nine embryos "have the potential
to become beautiful people."
The
thought of giving them up for research
" conjures all sorts of horrors, from Frankenstein to the Holocaust," she said, adding that destroying them would be preferable.
Her teenage
daughter favors letting another couple adopt the
embryos, but, Ms. Best said,
she would worry too much about "what kind of parents they were with,
what kind of life they had."
Another survey participant, Lynelle
Fowler McDonald, a case manager for a nonprofit social service agency
in Durham, N.C., has one embryo frozen at Duke. all that is left of
three failed efforts at the fertility clinic.
Given the physical
and-emotional stress, and the expense of in vitro
fertilization, Ms.
McDonald said she did not know whether she and her husband could go
t hrough it again. But to get rid of that last embryo would be final,
it would mean they were giving it up.
"There is still in the back of my
mind this hope," she said.
At the Genetics and IVF institute in
Fairfax, VA., Andrew Dorfmann, the chief embryologist, said many
patients were genuinely tom about what to do with extra embryos, and
that a few had
asked to be present to say a prayer when they were thawed and destroyed.
Jacqueline Betancourt,
a marketing analyst with a software company who took part in the
survey, said she and her husband donated their embryos
to science,
"whatever that means." It was important to them that the embryos
were
not just going to be discarded without any use being made of them.
Ms. Betancourt, who has two sons, said, "We didn't ask
many questions. We were just comfortable with the idea that
they weren't going to be destroyed. We didn't see the point in
destroying
something that could be useful to science, to other people, to helping
other people."
[In the course of their being "harvested" for their
stem cells the embryos will of course be destroyed].
Ms. Betancourt
said she wished there
had
been more discussion about the extra embryos early in the
process. If she had
known more, she said, she might
have considered creating fewer embryos in the first place.
*
*
*
* *
A
final comment. the right solution to this dilemma?
Listen to the Voice of Christ
speaking in His Church and avoid this whole procedure
altogether. As
Pope Benedict reminds us, children have a right to be born of their
parents'
natural
act of love.
*
*
*
* *