Other fertility treatments such as AID, the process where a donor sperm is injected into a woman or AIH, which is where the husband’s sperm is injected into the wife. Paul Ramsay, a protestant opposes the idea of AID, as he believes that reproduction should only be within marriage, as that is one of the only ways we remain faithful to God, as using a donor sperm is considered to be adultery and breaks the vows of marriage. RC Church also believes that AID is morally wrong as it goes against religious teaching such as the Ten Commandments, “thou shalt not commit adultery”, the RC church has a key view that one of the most important elements of the religious society is reproduction, but within a marriage and would question the child’s quality of life without a father, though isn’t this just the same as a child growing up in a separated home or where their father has died.
Natural Law has many issues with a right to a child through IVF, though they view it as primary precept to be able to reproduce though this clashes with the primary precept that we should protect innocent life, which in the situation of IVF, the innocent life of the embryo may be mistreated, as being property, experimented on or destroyed these all go against the precept of protecting innocent life. Natural law is an absolute theory that takes no account of the research benefits n embryos such as embryo stem cells that can be used to treat diseases or whether it leads to the happiness of an infertile couple having a child. It views the processes as wrong, as well the method of obtaining the sperm, as masturbation is viewed as a misuse of the genitalia.
Though another moral issues raised by IVF, Is the concept of “designer babies” created through the process of IVF which allows parents in some countries to select the gender of their child, as well as removing undesirable traits and adding ones that parents wants, this is genetic engineering of an embryo. Which has its own moral issues as it leads to a society of a single desirability known as eugenics, such as Adolf Hitler’s perfect race. RC Church views this as unethical as we’re playing God and to some degree goes against the sanctity of life as by changing our genetic characteristics we are changing the will of God. However, this process has advantages as it can benefit people by removing harmful genes that may cause cancer or other genetic diseases such as hemophilia, in a utilitarian view point this reduces suffering and promotes happiness, in fact it creates happiness for the greatest number as medical advances mean that the traits will also not be passed to the next generation.
Pater Singers views the embryo as not bring a person as it has no personhood, it is not fully human so therefore isn’t even human? Therefore utilitarianism neglects to view an embryo as sacred and doesn’t value its rights. Utilitarianism aims to create the greatest good for the greatest number, so if IVF does this then it is ethical, though it is hard to weigh up all the consequences, though we can assume that a family who wanted a baby will receives pleasure from successful IVF, though due to the low success rates of IVF this may affect the couple’s pleasure. Utilitarianism also looks at the cost of IVF and how the money could be used to save lives, increasing pleasure or even into infertility and miscarriage research, which would reduce IVF saving money and increasing pleasure y possibly finding an alternative option or medicine for infertility.
Finally Kantian ethics would follow the categorical imperatives which concerns treating peoples as an ends in themselves, so if you consider the fetus to be a person, embryo destruction would be wrong and viewed as murder. Is it justified to kill so many potential lives to create one life? An ethical problem in modern society is that people use IVF to create an embryo that is a genetic match to a sibling that is dying or as a cure for their illness would be seen as unethical as the embryo is being treated as a means to a end which is unethical. Kantian ethics looks at the universalizability of IVF, if everyone were able to produce via IVF would we not be changing our natural way of reproduction? Is it ethical to change something so human? Allow us to live in society were we choose the gender or characteristics of our children.
To conclude, IVF raises numerous ethical issues. Such as should it be free or is there an age limit for the treatment, does everyone really have a right to a child? Though it also pushes forward in human development by advancing medical understanding and overcoming genetic or natural problems, but will this lead to a perfect race where people who cant afford IVF may be less superior or will it create an equal race where everyone is a super baby of IVF. Many people around the disagree on religious grounds that a right to a child, is possibly a god given right and infertility is God’s will.
by
ollybulmanobgmailcom (student)
