So, most of us by now are aware that, due to the increase of IVF treatments in clinics all over the world, we now have a surplus of unwanted frozen embryos. These are viable embryos that were "conceived" outside of the mother's womb and frozen for future use or, as often happens, they end up being used for research or just dumped.
What happens is, when a woman goes for an IVF procedure, several embryos are made. The woman is encouraged to have at least two of the embryos placed in the uterus just in case one doesn't "take." Now, what happens to the rest? Well, the woman can pay to have it placed in "storage" or she can say she doesn't want them.
Now, I believe, as do most pro-life advocates, that life begins at conception. These embryos that are being stored, researched, dumped, etc are babies. They are children that are being chosen or refused.
Okay...the issue is that now it has come into question...can these "snowflake babies" be adopted? Well, the snap answer is yes. But I think we need to really stop and think about this. They are living beings, humans, people. They have, just as anyone does, a right to life. To adopt them would afford them that opportunity and provide for them loving and happy homes. What's the problem with that?
Well, possibly, there are two BIG problems with that.
#1--We can't be said to justify the immoral act by providing an "out"
#2--It could be seen as immoral based on the fact that it is a child conceived outside of the mother's womb and the adoptive mother would be acting as a surrogate.
Now, let me interject here that I know not everyone has an issue with #2. Based on my faith belief, I do, and I know there are many others out there who do as well. I am not trying to argue this point, or to open a debate on whether #2 is fact or fiction. The issue here is adoption of frozen embryos and I'm simply giving my thoughts on the matter. I am stating my personal faith based beliefs when I give #2 as an issue.
ALSO...I don't have a clear opinion of this issue one way or another at this point. I am simply putting my thoughts and feelings down and giving others the opportunity to share.
Okay, now that we have that out of the way.
#1--Just as with embryonic stem cell research, we have the moral issue of "does the end justify the means." Well, being pro-life, I am going to say no. Absolutely not. Just because a life can be saved, doesn't justify the murder of a child. Many many people have a "well, it's being done anyway, we may as well let something good come of it." The problem with that is, the act is wrong. The origin is wrong. The intent is wrong. But...we believe in a right to life. We believe that every life deserves the right to live. If life begins at conception, and these embryos are viable, they have a right to live. So, is it wrong for a man and a woman to decide that they want to provide a chance for these babies. If they are not refusing the possibility of their own children, and they are acting in love and charity to provide a life for a child, does it still qualify as wrong based on the original intent and what caused the baby to be in the limbo state it is in. Keeping also in mind that, most likely, the child will be dumped or used for research and killed. Where exactly would it be crossing the moral line? As things currently stand, this issue has not yet been decided.
#2--This is a BIG deal issue right here, but to give all sides, we have to go there. Now, I understand that not everyone holds the same fully pro-life stance as others. I also understand that many people will say that these methods are acceptable for a couple who can't have children. This is a particularly difficult issue for me because I am among those women. I have, by the grace of God a miracle child. I was told I would never carry to full term, and I did. Ten years later, I haven't been able to do that again as of yet. So, believe me, I KNOW the appeal of IVF treatments and surrogacy. But the problem is, God intended us to be family. Man and woman were intended to bring life through the sacramental union of marriage. What we do, as husband and wife, is a part of the covenant bond of marriage. So, if we go outside of that covenant bond for conceptions sake, well, we have made a way, of our own will, to bypass God's intention and His perfect creation. How perfect if conception can't happen? We may never know the answer to that question, but what I DO know, is that God will allow a barren woman to conceive when it is to his glory and of his will. It happened to Sarah, it happened to Elizabeth, it still happens.
Now, back to our issue of adoption of those embryos that were not conceived within the womb and are now in danger of death. Can we morally save them? Would that be surrogacy? Not really. Surrogacy is when a woman bears a child for another couple. Adoption of an embryo would be to provide a home and a pathway to life through the womb of the adoptive mother, and the purpose being for that adoptive mother to bring the child up as her own.
Here are a couple of links to articles regarding this specific issue
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0201fea5.asp
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/555780.aspx
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1696
No comments:
Post a Comment