One of the most frequent arguments used to support embryonic stem cell research suggests that it would be wasteful for society not to use the large number of frozen and "abandoned" embryos for scientific research for the betterment of humankind.
The argument is based on two presumptions; that the vast majority of frozen embryos are available to scientists for "harvesting" in order to obtain stem cells, and that "a good intention" is enough to justify the intentional killing of a human embryo.
What kind of response does the Church make? Two, in fact. First, to those who want to kill the embryos in their quest for stem cells; and secondly, to others who are responsible for creating and then abandoning their embryos but who are opposed to giving them up for research.
An 2003 article in the Washington Post mentioned that at that time there were at least 400,000 frozen human embryos in the United States, the highest population of human embryos in the world. Frozen embryos are a "by-product" of the in vitro fertility industry that inevitably harvests more eggs and subsequently produces more human embryos than the average couple uses in their attempts to have a child.
Typically, 12-24 eggs are extracted from a woman and then fertilized to create human embryos. These embryos are then incubated and eventually 2-4 of the "healthiest" are chosen for implantation and the rest are either frozen (for possible future use) or disposed of. The cost of cryopreservation (keeping the embryos frozen in liquid nitrogen) is about $1,500 per year per couple.
Two conflicting facts emerge from this picture of frozen and stored embryos. First, RAND researchers demonstrated in 2002 that less than 3 percent of the embryos would actually be released by couples for research, thus derailing a major argument used to support embryonic stem cell research. In fact, there is not a large surplus of "abandoned" embryos available for research.
Secondly, despite the fact that the vast majority (390,000 of the 400,000 frozen embryos) are designated by couples for future attempts at pregnancy, there is little chance that they will be used for such a purpose by the couples who created them. The result is that the population of frozen and "abandoned" human embryos is growing. And Catholics, among others, are beginning to ask about an appropriate moral response.
We begin by acknowledging that human embryos are human beings. This is simply a fact, demonstrable by solid genetic and biological science, not the result of a theological fiat:
"From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a new life is begun which is neither that of the father nor of the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being.... To this perpetual evidence…modern genetic science brings valuable confirmation. …Right from fertilization is begun the adventure of a human life…" (Donum Vitae, 1987).
As such, our moral considerations for the disposition of embryos must respect their nature as human beings. If it is wrong in the first place to produce human life as a commodity in a lab, turning a child from a "gift" into a "product," it would be even more so to experiment on these unconsenting human beings. That is more than clear. Yet we remain faced with the reality of more than 400,000 embryos frozen in suspended animation and apparently with no place else to go.
There are two other clear facts. On the one hand, these frozen embryos can continue their growth only if implanted in a womb. And, on the other hand, if removed from the liquid nitrogen then will quickly die and even if left frozen, they will inevitably die. What's to be done?
Interestingly enough, in 1996, Franciscan Father Maurizio Faggioni published an article in the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, on this very issue. Father Faggioni, a consultor to the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, suggested that the first moral responsibility belongs to the parents who should successively implant all the embryos they have created in the mother, leaving none in suspended animation and attempting to bring all to term eventually.
He also reminds us that the unnatural way these embryos have been conceived and preserved should not allow us to forget that they in fact remain human beings. Once they have begun the path of life, the path should not be impeded. Thus a husband, in the case of divorce, cannot morally oppose the mother's request to implant their frozen embryos.
But what about the abundant embryos that remain abandoned by parents who, while thankfully not allowing them to be used for experimentation, are unwilling to implant all they have created? Do we simply allow them to self-destruct in their frozen environment, as they eventually will? How does a pro-life church respond to the needs of these "the least of our brothers and sisters?"
Father Faggioni points out that certain Catholic authors have suggested that when the mother of an embryo cannot be found or refuses the transfer, "prenatal adoption" is a reasonable moral response. In other words, the embryo can be transferred into the womb of a willing woman who is not the genetic mother. This response clearly takes seriously the status of the embryo as a human being.
Some have argued that embryo adoption involves "material cooperation" in evil. There is certainly some danger that "prenatal" adoption could lead to confusion about the morality of in vitro fertilization and unintentionally lend some legitimacy to the industry.
However, it would seem clear that the adopting mother in no way is in formal cooperation with the creation of the embryo and is solely concerned with offering the only path to continued development. Does sustaining the actual "life" of the embryo trump the "principle" of material cooperation?
"Since the embryo must be treated as a person, it must also be defended in its integrity, tended and cared for, to the extent possible, in the same way as any other human being as far as medical assistance is concerned" (Donum Vitae, 1987). Vincentian Father Richard Benson is academic dean and professor of moral theology at St. John's Seminary, Camarillo. His column appears monthly in The Tidings. |