Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Catholic News

Home

Home
Catholic
Religion News
The insidious danger behind ‘family balancing’

The insidious danger behind ‘family balancing’

Last updated on: April 25, 2016 at 10:21 pm by CNA Daily News

The insidious danger behind ‘family balancing’ 2016-04-25T22:21:00+00:00 CNA Daily News

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Washington D.C., Apr 25, 2016 / 04:21 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- For years, expectant parents have relied on ultrasounds to find out the sex of their unborn baby.

But now, technology allows them to pick the sex of their child before he or she even enters the womb – a development that ethicists warn could have grave moral consequences.

Sex selection of human embryos orders a fertility company to “deliver a product” rather than a human child, said Dr. John Brehany, an ethicist and director of institutional relations at the National Catholic Bioethics Center.

Also, these companies are “ultimately taking actions to simply throw out” and “discard human beings,” which is fundamentally wrong, he told CNA.

Many expecting parents find out the gender of their unborn baby through an ultrasound screening, or through methods of prenatal testing that can determine the gender of a baby as early as 7 to 10 weeks gestation.

However, more and more couples are opting not just to find out the gender of their baby, but to actually determine whether their next child will be a boy or a girl, through the process of “family balancing.”

Procedures can cost into the tens of thousands of dollars. Couples might want a boy to carry on the family name or parents of two boys might want a baby girl badly enough to spend $100,000 and endure multiple assisted reproductive procedures to have one, as one couple did.

Advances in assisted reproductive technology have made this more possible, combined with in vitro fertilization where the human embryo – fertilized in a lab – is implanted in the mother’s womb.

Technology like pre-implantation genetic screening can ensure that a human embryo is of the desired sex and free from unwanted genetic abnormalities. To better ensure a “successful” implantation, multiple human embryos may be implanted in the mother.

This is done “in the expectation that some embryos will be lost and multiple pregnancy may not occur,” the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated in its 2008 document Dignitas Personae. “In this way, the practice of multiple embryo transfer implies a purely utilitarian treatment of embryos.”

The practice is on the rise in the U.S. A 2006 Johns Hopkins survey of U.S. fertility clinics showed 42 percent of clinics that conducted pre-implantation genetic screening offered it for non-medical sex-selection purposes.

Anna Higgins, an associate scholar at the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute who just authored a report on sex-selection abortion, thinks there has been a notable increase in the use of the practice, based on doctors’ statements and the number of clinics advertising gender selection and family balancing, as well as their “commercial success.”

But according to decades of Catholic moral teaching, sex selection and in vitro fertilization are clearly wrong, Dr. Brehany said.

“First and foremost, it separates procreation from incarnated marital love,” he told CNA, noting that the human embryo is created from sperm and an egg from the father and mother in a lab, outside the marital act. “It separates procreation from the manner in which God has designed human beings to come in to being, which should be in an actual act of marital love.”

Also, he added, gender selection through assisted reproductive methods “almost instantly subjects the child to the standards and sort of the pressures, if you will, of production, and of producing an object.”

Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for sex selection, he explained, involves pulling a cell out of a human embryo or zygote to run tests for its gender. This can not only endanger the human embryo, but if it is selected for implantation, the other human embryos that have been created are at risk of being discarded, frozen, or experimented upon.

Clinics are being paid to “deliver a product” according to the customer’s wishes, he said of the process, and are ultimately taking actions to simply throw out or otherwise discard human beings, and that’s profoundly problematic.”

Dignitas Personae makes it clear that in vitro fertilization is wrong: “The Church moreover holds that it is ethically unacceptable to dissociate procreation from the integrally personal context of the conjugal act: human procreation is a personal act of a husband and wife, which is not capable of substitution,” the document stated.

It also lists some of the evils resulting from the procedure – foremost the destruction of other embryos in the process, being discarded, frozen, or experimented upon.

“The blithe acceptance of the enormous number of abortions involved in the process of in vitro fertilization vividly illustrates how the replacement of the conjugal act by a technical procedure – in addition to being in contradiction with the respect that is due to procreation as something that cannot be reduced to mere reproduction – leads to a weakening of the respect owed to every human being,” the document says.

Ultimately, these assisted reproductive options used for sex selection “the Church would view as no better than abortion, and in some respects worse,” Brehany said.

“You’re picking one [embryo], you’re throwing out the others, and you’re doing this outside the context of marital love, which in some respects makes it worse [than sex-selective abortion], not better.”

Even the American Society of Reproductive Medicine admits that non-medical sex-selection is “controversial.”

Some of the arguments raised against it, the society noted in a 2015 ethics report, are that “long-term risks” to children might exist and that further evaluation needs to be done on the matter, along with the concern that parents will not be showing “unconditional” love to their children who deserve it.

Previous Post

April 24, 2016

Pope pays surprise visit to Earth Day celebration

Next Post

April 25, 2016 How Christian women suffer worse persecution than men

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Americas Asia - Pacific Europe Middle East - Africa Uncategorized US Vatican

Select a Month November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called ____ of God.

Select your answer to see how you score.

Servants Disciples Children Friends