Is it Morally Wrong to Use Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) to Conceive a Child?

When we discuss morality in the context of assisted reproductive technologies (ART), such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), it is important to consider our underlying beliefs and values. Some moral principles, like the commandment to not kill, are unambiguous. However, when it comes to medical procedures aimed at procreation, the perspective is more nuanced, depending on how one views medical intervention and its benefits.

The Larger Moral Question

Beliefs about whether it is morally acceptable to use medical interventions such as penicillin to cure a flu, an appendix removal surgery, or life-saving treatments for serious conditions should similarly apply to ART.

One of the main moral considerations surrounding ART involves the management of unused embryos. In a typical IVF cycle, there is a risk of unused embryos remaining in a frozen state. Some couples opt to fertilize fewer embryos, allowing nature to decide the number of potential pregnancies. Other couples donate these embryos to scientific research or to infertile couples. This approach aligns with a pro-family perspective, as it aims to maximize the benefits of the IVF process.

Embryo Donation and Adoption

Some IVF clinics offer the option of embryo adoption, where unused embryos are given to other infertile couples. For example, a couple I know has successfully adopted two embryos, resulting in two children born by a surrogate mother. These children are not genetically related to their adoptive parents, but the process offers a genetic link to other family members, which some may find significant. The fees associated with this process are often lower than those of traditional adoption, offering a practical and ethical alternative to traditional conception methods.

During the early stages of IVF, the embryos are just a tiny ball of cells in a test tube. As these cells are not yet specialized, they do not experience any sensation. Many couples choose to keep these cells in a suspended state, allowing for future potential pregnancies without the risk of an immediate pregnancy.

No Moral Issues with IVF

I personally have no moral objections to IVF. However, given the vast number of people and potential families, IVF should be a last resort. According to recent statistics, there are over 8 billion people alive worldwide, and approximately 700 million children under the age of 15 who are not part of a family. This suggests that many children are already born and capable of being adopted. For instance, then-President-elect Donald Trump made a public service announcement (PSA) encouraging his fellow Republicans to adopt the estimated 450,000 unused IVF embryos in the US. Unfortunately, this initiative did not result in significant adoptions, indicating that many individuals are not willing or unable to adopt these embryos despite the ethical benefits.

Conclusion

While the ethical considerations of ART may vary, the primary moral dilemma lies in how we manage unused embryos and ensure that every potential life has the opportunity to be loved and cared for. By exploring options like embryo adoption, we can address both the emotional and practical aspects of parenthood, ultimately promoting a more compassionate and inclusive society.