An ethical dilemma with IVF is the possible wrong that is done to the infertile couple or the expected child by the physician. The success of IVF depends on the number of embryos transferred to the woman’s uterus. Because the chance of survival of an embryo in IVF is small the more transfers made the greater the chance of the woman becoming pregnant, it also increases the risk of multiple pregnancies. IVF is not allowed by the Catholic Church because it separates the unitive and the procreative aspects of marriage. To separate the unitive and the procreative aspects of marriage is a mortal sin.
In addition the sperm donor commits a mortal sin in order to harvest the sperm which is needed for IVF. Although one human life may be created through the IVF technique, many surplus foetuses, (unborn babies), are destroyed through this process. Other surplus unborn babies are left frozen in the laboratories where they were manufactured as though they were not human beings, but simply consumer goods. They were not created in love through the marriage act as God intends. Multiple births also create danger to the health and well-being of the child.
Premature birth and low weight when born are also issues with this, also studies that have been undertaken spina bifida is at a higher risk with children made from IVF. Also the hormones that are taken by the female in order to become pregnant are always at risk of having problems or abnormalities to the unborn child. Aminiocentesis is another ethical dilemma, during the process if abnormalities are found the mother is offered the chance to terminate her pregnancy. The ethical issues surrounding amniocentesis are seen as centring on 4 focal points.
First is the policy of the diagnostic treatment centre. Here, 2 questions arise: Is the client involved in a high-risk pregnancy? And, if a positive diagnosis is made, will the parents’ consent to an abortion? Second is the role of the genetic counsellor, which is seen as supportive rather than leading. He should assist the prospective parents in reaching a decision to undergo amniocentesis and possible abortion that is mutually acceptable. The prospective parents, the third focal point, may face the question of deciding what is normal.
The clients must also realize the terrible strains that are put on a marriage into which a severely defective child has been born. The fourth focal point is public policy. While amniocentesis may appear to threaten some values held important in our society, the author regards the procedure as an interim solution on the road to an understanding of and ability to treat genetic defects. Contraception is another ethical dilemma as birth control operates before pregnancy begins, and until the sperm fertilises the egg there is nothing that is going to suffer loss and so the issue is very different from the case of abortion.
And since the egg and sperm would cease to exist whether fertilisation takes place or not, they can’t be said to suffer loss, either. Non-religious arguments about birth control are therefore concerned only with the rights of the parents and with the consequences for those parents and for society in general. The issue of possibly killing a person, and of the rights of the mother versus the rights of the foetus, which dominate the topic of abortion, do not arise. Some people think it’s wrong as it is wrong to interfere with the natural order of the universe.
People in certain religions also see it as wrong because of the fact that it is like abortion as some birth control techniques can operate by preventing the implantation and development of a fertilized egg. Those opposed to such methods say that this amounts to an abortion, and that if abortion is wrong then those forms of contraception must also be wrong. http://brendakaren. wordpress. com/2009/04/15/some-moral-and-ethical-issues-concerning-ivf-techniques/ http://www. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/pubmed/4418247 Contraception!!! http://www. bbc. co. uk/ethics/contraception/contraception_abortion. shtml