Begotten, Not Made: Is IVF ethical?

With IVF, “procreating begins to turn into manufacturing, and persons (children) into objects.”

~Professor Peter J. Kreeft

Husbands and wives “make love,” they do not “make babies.” They give expression to their love for one another, and a child may or may not be engendered by that act of love. The marital act is not a manufacturing process, and children are not products. Like the Son of God himself, we are the kind of beings who are “begotten, not made” and, therefore, of equal status and dignity with our parents. . . . [C]onception should occur from the marriage act which by its nature is ordered toward loving openness to life, not from the manipulations of technicians.

~Dr. John M. Hass, “Begotten Not Made”

How should pro-lifers view in vitro fertilization?

The phrase in vitro is Latin for “in glass” – or in modern English “in a glass dish” or “in a test tube.” By way of modern science, these babies are often called “test-tube babies” because the laboratory’s “test tube” or “Petri dish” is now where a person is made. After the Alabama Supreme Court ruled their state’s wrongful death statute applied to embryos, and therefore defended life, the conversation about ethics and in vitro fertilization (IVF) became a focal point in the news. Even pro-life individuals have found themselves wondering where to stand on this divisive and sensitive issue. After all . . .

Doesn’t being pro-life mean supporting those who wish to create life and start a family via IVF, especially in a society that so often wants to destroy life through abortion?
Shouldn’t we celebrate the people who want children so badly that they are willing to go through the painful and often heartwrenching journey of IVF?

The answer is a clear-cut No. Pro-lifers should strongly reject IVF. Here are four points to consider:

(1) Defend the Right to Life. The dignity of all human embryos cannot be abandoned in search for an answer to infertility. We must recognize that the moment an embryo is created – whether it be naturally or in a lab setting – an inherently valuable human life has been formed that is endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights. They are “persons with potential”; not “potential persons.” To create embryos in excess (for instance, creating 10 embryos “just in case,” when the couple only intends to have one child) and then destroy or permanently freeze the “extra” embryos is a sickening violation of human life and dignity.

“Every human being, from the point of conception, is a member of the human family with value and dignity,” a letter from several pro-life organizations reads. “Every new human organism, from the instant of egg-sperm fusion, is an unrepeatable member of the human species with characteristics never before seen and never to be seen again. There is no rational dividing line in human development between valuable and non-valuable humans: any division based on mental or physical development involves drawing artificial and ableist lines without any justification.”

The IVF industry will continue to explore unethical, unnatural and potentially disastrous “advancements,” such as creating “gene-edited designer babies” – which is nothing short of eugenics – and creating three-parent embryos, a practice currently banned by federal law. Just like all other profit-driven industries, they will continue to pursue unethical avenues in search of greater profit margins with little to no regard for morality. Radical laws have even been proposed that would allow young girls to become surrogates without parental involvement or consent. There is a dark facet of the IVF industry that seeks to exploit and commercialize women and babies for their own gain, with no regard to the mental or physical well-being of those individuals. This is the side of the IVF industry that we must examine more closely in the years to come.

“The standard operating procedures of IVF clinics come at the expense of a child’s well-being and often abusively instrumentalize third parties,” the letter continued. “The practice of surrogacy, in which a woman receives financial compensation to gestate a baby that she will not raise and over whom she has no rights, is a wrongful commodification of women’s bodies.”

(2) Follow the Money. IVF is the “cash-cow” of the infertility industry. Furthermore, IVF does not address the root issue involved with a struggle to become pregnant. An article on Live Action points out:

Professor Robert Winston, a British infertility expert, explained that IVF is not a “treatment” for infertility, because it does not address the underlying causes. It is instead used as a “blanket treatment” for infertility, forgoing attempts to learn why a couple is struggling to become pregnant.

There is nothing wrong with supporting natural fertility and the sexual act, but there is something wrong with replacing natural fertility, and IVF replaces it. (See below.)

Laboratory Fertilization Of Eggs In IVF Treatment

(3) Look at the Historical Trend. In American history, the rise of artificial birth control or “The Pill,” especially during the Sexual Revolution (1965–1975), redefined the sexual act as essentially a quest for pleasure, and it redefined the very well-springs of human life itself by involving modern technology (a man-made, pharmaceutical drug). So now does IVF “redefine the sexual act,” as part of a Sex-Tech Revolution we might say, but from another direction: Just as birth control aims get “sex without children,” in our current culture IVF aims to get “children without sex.”

(4) Understand the Design of the Sexual Act. The sexual act is the procreative act, per the innate design and purpose of the reproductive system. Artificial attempts like IVF violate God’s design and purpose. Translated from the Latin as “The Gift of Life,” the document Donum Vitae: Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation (1987), applies timeless traditional Christian principles to the modern issue of IVF:

“Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible [than non-married people], yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that ‘entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the . . . equality that must be common to parents and children’.”

And Dr. John M. Hass explains in more depth:

The document speaks of “the right of every person to be conceived and to be born within marriage and from marriage.” To be within and from marriage, conception should occur from the marriage act which by its nature is ordered toward loving openness to life, not from the manipulations of technicians. The dehumanizing aspects of some of these procedures is evident in the very language associated with them. There is the “reproductive technology industry.” Children are called the “products” of conception. Inherent in IVF is the treatment of children, in their very coming into being, as less than human being.

God created sex-and-children to go together; it is man who aims to divorce these. In our actions, we should honor Him as our loving Heavenly Father who knows and wants our best; and in harmony, traditional Christian ethics raises concerns about both birth control as well as IVF – regardless of what modern voices proclaim, and regardless of how popular these practices are in society. With IVF, “procreating begins to turn into manufacturing, and persons (children) into objects,” writes Professor Peter J. Kreeft.

Yes, and in contrast to modern voices, we stand for imagio dei, the beautiful truth that all persons are created in the immortal image of God. We defend the human dignity of all persons (not some), all people large and small, even those in a test tube. Furthermore, we defend the natural design and purpose of the sexual act as a gift from a loving Creator to beget children, not manufacture and manipulate children by way of technicians: Children are not products. We hope that as the discussion of IVF continues, our nation can find a way to enforce ethics and begin respecting the inherent dignity of human life, beginning with its origins.

If you’re interested in exploring the topic of life further, we encourage you to download our free booklets. Read more in our educational booklet Pro-Life Logic: Tyranny, or Murder?