36. Transmission of Life: Artificial Fertilization
50. Concept of Artificial Fertilization
Marriage is an institution that exists for the sake of love, not merely for the purpose of biological reproduction. The intentions and the attention of each partner should be fixed upon the other, upon his or her good. Marital intercourse is—and should be--an interpersonal act, the result of reciprocal betrothed love between the spouses. Intercourse is necessary to marital love, not just to procreation. The marital act is not an act of “making,” either babies or love. Love is not a product that one makes; it is a gift that one gives—the gift of self. It must be an act of unification of persons, and not merely the instrument or means of procreation.
As we have studied, human life comes as a gift, crowning the marital act itself. This act perfects the spouses, and, from that gift, a baby is born, equal in dignity to its parents.
A human being is something precious and good, a person, a being of incalculable value, worthy of respect, a bearer of inviolable rights, a being who ought to be loved.1
Children, who are persons equal in dignity to their mothers and fathers, are to be begotten in the loving embrace of husband and wife, and not through acts of fornication and adultery, nor are they to be “made” in the laboratory and treated as products inferior to their producers.2
Artificial fertilization is any process by which fertilization of an ovum takes place not as a result of the act of sexual intercourse, but as a result of the sperm being introduced into the woman by means of an artificial process.
These techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life. Apart from the fact that they are morally unacceptable, since they separate procreation from the fully human context of the conjugal act, these techniques have a high rate of failure: not just failure in relation to fertilization but with regard to the subsequent development of the embryo, which is exposed to the risk of death, generally within a very short space of time. Furthermore, the number of embryos produced is often greater than that needed for implantation in the woman’s womb, and these so-called “spare embryos” are then destroyed or used for research which, under the pretext of scientific or medical progress, in fact reduces human life to the level of simple “biological material” to be freely disposed of.3
The very term artificial fertilization raises many questions about the protection of the dignity of human sexuality and procreation. This technique is sometimes sought by infertile couples who desire to have a baby. While this desire is noble and legitimate and even to be encouraged, it must be remembered that a baby is a gift from God. Couples do not have a right to have a baby and much less the right to go against the laws of morality in having one. Every act (that is, the chosen course of action, or object) has its own morality, and a good intention does not justify an intrinsically evil act. Greater good comes to the infertile couple themselves and to the whole of society by the respect that is given to God’s law for marriage and the family. The Lord of creation is the only one who has dominion over human procreation. It is his will that some couples give Christian witness in marriage without children of their own and thus fulfill their mission in society. He will bless them in this mission in countless ways.
51. Artificial Insemination
There are two types of artificial insemination:
i) Homologous artificial insemination (AIH), from the husband
ii) Heterologous artificial insemination (AID), from a donor other than the husband
Artificial insemination as well as in vitro fertilization involve manipulative, artificial techniques that threaten to convert procreation (a human act) into a mere technique that is devoid of interpersonal relations. The offspring ought to be the fruit of an act of love of the parents, the conjugal act. This act is the only dignified way of engendering new life. The child is the fruit of the conjugal union. John Paul II teaches that man originates from an act of procreation that is not exclusively biological, but also spiritual. This is so because the parents are united by the “bond of matrimony.”4
51a) Artificial Insemination by the Husband (AIH)
The process of artificial insemination by the husband (AIH) involves getting a specimen of sperm from the husband and implanting it into the fallopian tubes or other part of the woman’s reproductive organs. The conjugal act does not take place. To obtain the specimen by masturbation is against the moral law. The implantation of the sperm by a mechanical instrument replaces the marriage act with a laboratory procedure and converts something sacred into something mechanical.
By this procedure, the unitive aspect of the conjugal act is separated from the procreative aspect. This is the main reason for the moral objections to this method.
Each child must be the fruit of an act of love that is the expression of total self-giving in the language of the body. AIH is, therefore, not a morally acceptable means of achieving fertilization.
On the other hand, it is lawful to help the natural conjugal act attain its purpose. After the conjugal act, the sperm may be collected from the female organ and deposited in the fallopian tubes so as “to facilitate and help” procreation. This case may be morally acceptable because the union between the unitive and procreative aspects of the act is maintained. As yet, the Church has not spoken definitively on this, but seems to allow this possibility.5
51b) Artificial Insemination by a Donor (AID)
In the process of artificial insemination by a donor (AID), the sperm is obtained from a third party. Therefore, it contravenes the property of unity of the natural institution of marriage and is gravely immoral. It is as though the wife had conjugal relations with a man other than her husband. The process also contravenes the rights of the child, because it deprives him of a proper filial relationship with his parents and, thus, can hinder the maturation of his personal identity.
The origin of a human person is the result of an act of giving. The one conceived must be the fruit of his parents’ love. He cannot be desired or conceived as the product of an intervention of medical or biological techniques; that would be equivalent to reducing him to an object of scientific technology.6
52. In Vitro Fertilization (Test Tube Babies)
In vitro means, “in a test tube,” that is, outside the human body as opposed to in vivo, which means inside it. The process of in vitro fertilization involves fertilizing a number of ova in test tubes with sperm that is usually obtained through masturbation. The embryos (babies) that are useful are implanted into the mother’s womb; those that are not useful are discarded.
This process, therefore, always involves abortion, which is always murder. The procedure is against the sacredness of human life and the dignity of the human being.
In in vitro fertilization the technician does not simply assist the marital act, but substitutes for that act.… The technician has thus become the principal cause of generation, acting through the instrumental forces of sperm and ovum.
Moreover, the claim that in vitro fertilization is an “extension” of the marital act, and not a substitution for it, is simply contrary to the fact. What is extended is not the act of intercourse, but the intention; from an intention to beget a child naturally to getting it by IVF, by artificial insemination, or by help of a surrogate mother.7
Sometimes, the embryos are frozen for future use (cryo-preservation). This technique unnecessarily exposes human life to risk of death and degradation.
Fertilization achieved outside the bodies of the couple remains by this very fact deprived of the meaning and the values that are expressed in the language of the body, and in the union of human persons.
The transmission of human life is entrusted by nature to a personal and conscious act and as such is subject to the all-holy laws of God; immutable and inviolable laws, which must be recognized and observed. For this reason one cannot use means and follow methods that could be licit in the transmission of the life of plants and animals.8
53. Related Issues
53a) Surrogate Motherhood
Surrogate motherhood involves the hiring of a womb. A baby is conceived in the womb of one woman and is then transferred to the womb of another for the second woman to carry the baby until birth. It involves bringing a second woman into the marriage relationship and is, therefore, against the property of unity of the natural institution of marriage. It contravenes the right of the child to be conceived, carried in the womb, brought into the world, and brought up by its own parents. It represents a failure to meet the demands of maternal love and responsible motherhood.9 It also raises doubts about the identity of the mother, as well as legal problems.
53b) Gestation of Human Embryos in Animals
The practice of gestation of human embryos in animals is against the right to be conceived and to be born within marriage and from marriage. It is against human dignity.10
53c) Cloning
The process of cloning involves reproducing human beings without any connection with sexuality. It is also against the right to be conceived and born within marriage and from marriage.11
53d) Pre-Nuptial Certificate
In some countries, a medical examination is recommended before marriage. This is justified especially when there is a high probability that the future spouses may be carriers of hereditary diseases. This medical examination may be morally lawful as long as it is not converted into an impediment to marriage. A pre-nuptial certificate, moreover, must not be obligatory or eliminatory.
The pre-nuptial medical inquiry must be restricted to information that will help the couple face their responsibilities. Future spouses should be aware of the limitations of such a document. Genetic counseling includes three aspects:
i) Diagnosis of existing familial diseases
ii) Probability of the disease in the couple or their descendants, expressed in numerical figures
iii) Responses to questions
53e) Fertility Tests
A fertility test is done one year or so after continuous marital life, when necessary. There are ways whereby a specimen of semen can be obtained in a moral way. Obtaining semen specimens by masturbation is never morally licit.
53f) Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal diagnosis reveals the sex of the unborn child; it is morally licit if it respects the life and integrity of the fetus. It is sinful when the thought of a possible abortion is present, depending on the results.12
Footnotes:
1. W. May, Marriage, the Rock on which the Family is Built, 17.
2. Ibid., 19.
3. John Paul II, Enc. Evangelium Vitae, 14.
4. John Paul II, Address, Oct. 29, 1983.
5. Cf. CCC, 2377.
6. Cf. Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, 82; CCC, 2376, 2377.
7. W. May, Marriage, the Rock on which the Family is Built, 98.
8. Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, 82; cf. CCC, 2376, 2377.
9. Cf. CCC, 2376.
10. Cf. Ibid., 2275, 2376.
11. Cf. Ibid.
12. Cf. Ibid., 2274; John Paul II, Enc. Evangelium Vitae, 14, 63.
Marriage is an institution that exists for the sake of love, not merely for the purpose of biological reproduction. The intentions and the attention of each partner should be fixed upon the other, upon his or her good. Marital intercourse is—and should be--an interpersonal act, the result of reciprocal betrothed love between the spouses. Intercourse is necessary to marital love, not just to procreation. The marital act is not an act of “making,” either babies or love. Love is not a product that one makes; it is a gift that one gives—the gift of self. It must be an act of unification of persons, and not merely the instrument or means of procreation.
As we have studied, human life comes as a gift, crowning the marital act itself. This act perfects the spouses, and, from that gift, a baby is born, equal in dignity to its parents.
A human being is something precious and good, a person, a being of incalculable value, worthy of respect, a bearer of inviolable rights, a being who ought to be loved.1
Children, who are persons equal in dignity to their mothers and fathers, are to be begotten in the loving embrace of husband and wife, and not through acts of fornication and adultery, nor are they to be “made” in the laboratory and treated as products inferior to their producers.2
Artificial fertilization is any process by which fertilization of an ovum takes place not as a result of the act of sexual intercourse, but as a result of the sperm being introduced into the woman by means of an artificial process.
These techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life. Apart from the fact that they are morally unacceptable, since they separate procreation from the fully human context of the conjugal act, these techniques have a high rate of failure: not just failure in relation to fertilization but with regard to the subsequent development of the embryo, which is exposed to the risk of death, generally within a very short space of time. Furthermore, the number of embryos produced is often greater than that needed for implantation in the woman’s womb, and these so-called “spare embryos” are then destroyed or used for research which, under the pretext of scientific or medical progress, in fact reduces human life to the level of simple “biological material” to be freely disposed of.3
The very term artificial fertilization raises many questions about the protection of the dignity of human sexuality and procreation. This technique is sometimes sought by infertile couples who desire to have a baby. While this desire is noble and legitimate and even to be encouraged, it must be remembered that a baby is a gift from God. Couples do not have a right to have a baby and much less the right to go against the laws of morality in having one. Every act (that is, the chosen course of action, or object) has its own morality, and a good intention does not justify an intrinsically evil act. Greater good comes to the infertile couple themselves and to the whole of society by the respect that is given to God’s law for marriage and the family. The Lord of creation is the only one who has dominion over human procreation. It is his will that some couples give Christian witness in marriage without children of their own and thus fulfill their mission in society. He will bless them in this mission in countless ways.
51. Artificial Insemination
There are two types of artificial insemination:
i) Homologous artificial insemination (AIH), from the husband
ii) Heterologous artificial insemination (AID), from a donor other than the husband
Artificial insemination as well as in vitro fertilization involve manipulative, artificial techniques that threaten to convert procreation (a human act) into a mere technique that is devoid of interpersonal relations. The offspring ought to be the fruit of an act of love of the parents, the conjugal act. This act is the only dignified way of engendering new life. The child is the fruit of the conjugal union. John Paul II teaches that man originates from an act of procreation that is not exclusively biological, but also spiritual. This is so because the parents are united by the “bond of matrimony.”4
51a) Artificial Insemination by the Husband (AIH)
The process of artificial insemination by the husband (AIH) involves getting a specimen of sperm from the husband and implanting it into the fallopian tubes or other part of the woman’s reproductive organs. The conjugal act does not take place. To obtain the specimen by masturbation is against the moral law. The implantation of the sperm by a mechanical instrument replaces the marriage act with a laboratory procedure and converts something sacred into something mechanical.
By this procedure, the unitive aspect of the conjugal act is separated from the procreative aspect. This is the main reason for the moral objections to this method.
Each child must be the fruit of an act of love that is the expression of total self-giving in the language of the body. AIH is, therefore, not a morally acceptable means of achieving fertilization.
On the other hand, it is lawful to help the natural conjugal act attain its purpose. After the conjugal act, the sperm may be collected from the female organ and deposited in the fallopian tubes so as “to facilitate and help” procreation. This case may be morally acceptable because the union between the unitive and procreative aspects of the act is maintained. As yet, the Church has not spoken definitively on this, but seems to allow this possibility.5
51b) Artificial Insemination by a Donor (AID)
In the process of artificial insemination by a donor (AID), the sperm is obtained from a third party. Therefore, it contravenes the property of unity of the natural institution of marriage and is gravely immoral. It is as though the wife had conjugal relations with a man other than her husband. The process also contravenes the rights of the child, because it deprives him of a proper filial relationship with his parents and, thus, can hinder the maturation of his personal identity.
The origin of a human person is the result of an act of giving. The one conceived must be the fruit of his parents’ love. He cannot be desired or conceived as the product of an intervention of medical or biological techniques; that would be equivalent to reducing him to an object of scientific technology.6
52. In Vitro Fertilization (Test Tube Babies)
In vitro means, “in a test tube,” that is, outside the human body as opposed to in vivo, which means inside it. The process of in vitro fertilization involves fertilizing a number of ova in test tubes with sperm that is usually obtained through masturbation. The embryos (babies) that are useful are implanted into the mother’s womb; those that are not useful are discarded.
This process, therefore, always involves abortion, which is always murder. The procedure is against the sacredness of human life and the dignity of the human being.
In in vitro fertilization the technician does not simply assist the marital act, but substitutes for that act.… The technician has thus become the principal cause of generation, acting through the instrumental forces of sperm and ovum.
Moreover, the claim that in vitro fertilization is an “extension” of the marital act, and not a substitution for it, is simply contrary to the fact. What is extended is not the act of intercourse, but the intention; from an intention to beget a child naturally to getting it by IVF, by artificial insemination, or by help of a surrogate mother.7
Sometimes, the embryos are frozen for future use (cryo-preservation). This technique unnecessarily exposes human life to risk of death and degradation.
Fertilization achieved outside the bodies of the couple remains by this very fact deprived of the meaning and the values that are expressed in the language of the body, and in the union of human persons.
The transmission of human life is entrusted by nature to a personal and conscious act and as such is subject to the all-holy laws of God; immutable and inviolable laws, which must be recognized and observed. For this reason one cannot use means and follow methods that could be licit in the transmission of the life of plants and animals.8
53. Related Issues
53a) Surrogate Motherhood
Surrogate motherhood involves the hiring of a womb. A baby is conceived in the womb of one woman and is then transferred to the womb of another for the second woman to carry the baby until birth. It involves bringing a second woman into the marriage relationship and is, therefore, against the property of unity of the natural institution of marriage. It contravenes the right of the child to be conceived, carried in the womb, brought into the world, and brought up by its own parents. It represents a failure to meet the demands of maternal love and responsible motherhood.9 It also raises doubts about the identity of the mother, as well as legal problems.
53b) Gestation of Human Embryos in Animals
The practice of gestation of human embryos in animals is against the right to be conceived and to be born within marriage and from marriage. It is against human dignity.10
53c) Cloning
The process of cloning involves reproducing human beings without any connection with sexuality. It is also against the right to be conceived and born within marriage and from marriage.11
53d) Pre-Nuptial Certificate
In some countries, a medical examination is recommended before marriage. This is justified especially when there is a high probability that the future spouses may be carriers of hereditary diseases. This medical examination may be morally lawful as long as it is not converted into an impediment to marriage. A pre-nuptial certificate, moreover, must not be obligatory or eliminatory.
The pre-nuptial medical inquiry must be restricted to information that will help the couple face their responsibilities. Future spouses should be aware of the limitations of such a document. Genetic counseling includes three aspects:
i) Diagnosis of existing familial diseases
ii) Probability of the disease in the couple or their descendants, expressed in numerical figures
iii) Responses to questions
53e) Fertility Tests
A fertility test is done one year or so after continuous marital life, when necessary. There are ways whereby a specimen of semen can be obtained in a moral way. Obtaining semen specimens by masturbation is never morally licit.
53f) Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal diagnosis reveals the sex of the unborn child; it is morally licit if it respects the life and integrity of the fetus. It is sinful when the thought of a possible abortion is present, depending on the results.12
Footnotes:
1. W. May, Marriage, the Rock on which the Family is Built, 17.
2. Ibid., 19.
3. John Paul II, Enc. Evangelium Vitae, 14.
4. John Paul II, Address, Oct. 29, 1983.
5. Cf. CCC, 2377.
6. Cf. Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, 82; CCC, 2376, 2377.
7. W. May, Marriage, the Rock on which the Family is Built, 98.
8. Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae, 82; cf. CCC, 2376, 2377.
9. Cf. CCC, 2376.
10. Cf. Ibid., 2275, 2376.
11. Cf. Ibid.
12. Cf. Ibid., 2274; John Paul II, Enc. Evangelium Vitae, 14, 63.