|
|
Aticella, |
|
|
Aticella, |
10. IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION, SURROGACY, and “ EXTRA EMBRYOS”
10.1. In-Vitro Fertilization (First tx for infert., Domination of Nature, removal of sex from procreation, side-effects and risks to mother and infant)
10.2. Surrogacy
Dign.Infinita (2024) [on Surrogacy, but not specifically IVF]
10.3. The Insoluble Dilemma of Frozen Embryos
10.4. Multiple Gestations - IUI and IVF
10.5. Genetic “enhancement” (=Neo-Eugenics). cf NYT article, 2025 04-01: “Should Human Life be Optimized?”[pdf] [.doc]
10.6. “The Other IVF” Excellent summary of risks; advocates tk of infertility.
11. STEM-CELL RESEARCH:
11.1. David Albert Jones' Summary of Current State of Stem-Cell Research
11.2. The Biology of Stem Cells
11.4.
Broader picture of Bioethical Questions concerning Beginning of Life
Caritas in Veritate - 51 (The Church has a responsibility
towards creation), 74-75
(Bioethics as a crucial battleground)
READING:
1. Audi, "Assembling the Global Baby" (Wall Street Journal, January, 2010)
2. Jones, D.A. "Stem Cells" (The Tablet, 2012)
3. May, ch. 3, pp. 67-113.
This Webpage was created for a workshop held at Saint Andrew's Abbey, Valyermo, California in 2002 “”
“”
Sussman, “Should Human Life be Optimized?”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/04/01/opinion/ivf-gene-selection-fertility.html PDF / doc
[...] Today [April 1, 2025] some form of preimplantation genetic testing, or P.G.T., is used in over half of I.V.F. cycles in the United States, at a cost of $3,000 to $5,000 per batch of embryos. The most common options patients have are tests for extra or missing chromosomes, structural chromosomal rearrangements that can trigger pregnancy loss and disorders linked to a single gene, such as cystic fibrosis and muscular dystrophy. [...]
[...The company Orchid is described as:] a way of helping parents anticipate [...] genetic misfortunes.
Orchid screens embryos’ DNA for hundreds of conditions, such as retinitis pigmentosa, which can be traced to a single genetic variant. But the company also goes further, offering what is known as polygenic screening, which gives parents what is essentially a risk profile on each embryo’s propensity for conditions such as heart disease, for which the genetic component is far more complex.
Today it is an expensive procedure offered to patients undergoing I.V.F., who are often but not always infertile couples seeking treatment. But Ms. Siddiqui — and others in Silicon Valley, where investors in and users of this technology abound — envision such comprehensive screening eventually replacing the old-fashioned way of having children altogether. “Sex is for fun, and embryo screening is for babies,” she said in a video she shared on X. “It’s going to become insane not to screen for these things.”
“These things” presumably refers to conditions like obesity and autism, both of which Orchid says it can screen for. What she and others who run screening companies tend to talk about even less is that such things could also include traits like intellectual ability and height.
The regulatory regimes that govern the creation of life around the world vary widely. Portugal generally limits cryopreservation of embryos to three years; in Britain, it’s 55. Poland requires that unused embryos be donated to other couples, anonymously, after 20 years, even if the original patients continue to pay to keep them stored. Israel permits parents to request posthumous sperm retrieval after the death of a son. Single women in China are generally not allowed to freeze their eggs, and in South Korea they may not use I.V.F. In the United Arab Emirates, I.V.F. is only for married couples, and the use of donor sperm or eggs is against the law, as Sunni Muslim clerics have declared it a form of adultery since it introduces a third party into the marriage.
In the United States, despite more than $1 billion invested in fertility-focused start-ups in the past decade, there is remarkably little regulation or even basic public scrutiny of what practices are acceptable. Instead, venture capital and private equity firms have spurred the creation of technologies and innovations in the field, with no mechanism in place for oversight.
Today the United States is known for its wide range of available services, which include sex selection and even eye color choice, as well as polygenic embryo screening, and has become a destination for fertility patients from around the world.
