|HARBINGER OF THE BRAVE NEW BIOLOGICAL WORLD
The man-moulders of the new age will be armed with the powers of an
omnicompetent state and an irresistible scientific technique: We shall
get at last a race of conditioners who really can cut out all
posterity in whatever shape they please.
C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man.
The attack [by pro-lifers on IVF] includes a condemnation of
sacrifice even of a zygote as a form of abortion, abortion being held
to be (as such) immoral. This means that embryology, fetology, and all
forms of laboratory reproduction are immoral that physicians and
scientists are murderers.
I respect the ethics of scientists, which is primarily a love for
and search for the facts, but some scientists seem to have an almost
blind faith that somehow the facts will be used to good purposes, not
misused for evil.
If the greatest good of the greatest number (i.e., the social good)
were served by it, it would be justifiable not only to specialize the
capacities of people by cloning or by constructive genetic
engineering, but also to bio-engineer or bio-design para-humans or
"modified men" as chimeras (part animal) or cyborg-androids
(part prostheses). I would vote for cloning top-grade soldiers and
scientists, or for supplying them through other genetic means, if they
were needed to offset an elitist or tyrannical power plot by other
cloners a truly science-fiction situation, but imaginable. I suspect I
would favor making and using man-machine hybrids rather than
genetically designed people for dull, unrewarding or dangerous roles
needed nonetheless for the community's welfare perhaps the testing of
suspected pollution areas or the investigation of threatening volcanos
People who appeal to Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four and
Fahrenheit 451 forget this, that the tyranny is set up first and then
genetic controls are employed.
Coital reproduction, is, therefore, less human than laboratory
reproduction more fun, to be sure, but with our separation of baby
making from lovemaking, both become more human because they are
matters of choice, and not chance. This is, of course, essentially the
case for planned parenthood. I cannot see how either humanity or
morality are served by genetic roulette.
To be men we must be in control. That is the first and the last
ethical word. For when there is no choice, there is no possibility of
ethical action. Whatever we are compelled to do is a-moral.
Rights are nothing but a formal recognition by society of certain
human needs, and as needs change with changing conditions, so rights
should change too. The right to conceive and bear children has to stop
short of knowingly making crippled children and genetics gives us that
knowledge ... It is human need that validates rights, not the other
'Bioethicist' Joseph Fletcher.
THEY SAY BABIES ARE MADE IN HEAVEN,
BUT WE KNOW BETTER.
Sign on an IVF clinic waiting room wall.
The IVF process is remarkably simple to describe. In-vitro
(literally, "in glass") fertilization is the beginning of a
new human being outside the mother's body.
The first step in an in-vitro fertilization is to obtain a
healthy egg from the woman. This is accomplished during a laparoscopy
performed under general anesthesia. A laparoscope (a camera with a
miniature flashlight attached to its head) is inserted into an incision
in the vicinity of the woman's navel. The physician locates a ripe egg
that is about to be released from the follicle and extracts it with an
aspirator tube. More advanced techniques make use of ultrasound, and a
'band-aid' incision is made under local anesthesia.
The retrieved egg is placed in a dish filled with a nutrient and
exposed for half a day to a few drops of sperm. If the egg is
fertilized, it is monitored for proper growth. At the 3rd or 4th day,
(approximately the 8- or 16-cell stage), the embryo is inserted into the
donating woman's uterus with a catheter or tube which is passed through
On July 25, 1978, Louise Brown, the first baby conceived in a Petri
dish, was born. Since that date, more than 15,000 such babies have been
born, about one-third of which have been in the United States. Other
leading practitioners of IVF are England, France, Germany, Austria,
Belgium, and Australia.
The first child to be conceived through IVF, frozen, thawed,
implanted and born is Zoe Leyland of Melbourne, Australia, who was born
on March 28, 1984. Her mother was superovulated and produced 11 eggs, 10
of which were deliberately destroyed through abortion or died in the
Zoe was very lucky indeed to survive.
The Moral Objections to
The very probability that we may be faced with a human person in
the full sense constitutes, in my opinion, an absolute veto against
any type of [in-vitro] experimentation.
Perverting the Original Plan. In 1979, a Federal Ethics
Advisory Board (stacked, as these committees invariably are, with
pro-abortionists) concluded that IVF research was "ethically
acceptable," while at the same time acknowledging the dangers of
abuse and unspecified risks that accompany the procedure.
They ignored the basic fact that IVF by 'semen donor' is technically
adultery, and gave only passing reference to the future horrors
predicted by Joseph Fletcher in this chapter's lengthy opening quote.
It seems that bioethicists no longer glorify the way reproduction
should be: Sex with babies. Instead, they glorify sex without babies
(contraception, sterilization, and abortion) and babies without sex (IVF).
It is quite certain that God did not intend the reproductive miracle
of His creations to be bypassed and abused so horribly. The Vatican
newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, speaking for many Christians, has
condemned the practice of IVF and stated that women who participate in
IVF and surrogate motherhood "... have been used for nine months as
an incubator, prisoner of the egoism of the mother and of detestable
techniques," and quotes heavily the Vatican document
"Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on Dignity
Creating Life in Order to Destroy It.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has funded extensive IVF research
since 1972 but not to help childless women become pregnant!
The International Population Union Conference on the Scientific Study
of Population, held in London on 1969, was funded by the governments of
the United Kingdom, Denmark, Finland, West Germany, Norway, Sweden, and
the United States. Their real, unobstructed vision for IVF was neatly
summed up in the opening speech; "There are grounds for hoping that
the use of IVF embryos for research will lead to the discovery of
efficient new methods of population control. This is the real
justification for the promotion and funding of IVF by governments and
organizations involved in population planning."
The research proposed and funded at this conference (and all those
held ever since) has been delving into the possibility of finding a pill
that would destroy the corpus luteum whether or not fertilization
had taken place (the corpus luteum secretes progesterone, which
maintains an embryo and prepares the uterine lining to accept it). For
this purpose, a very large and continuous supply of human embryos is
required, and most of these are supplied by government-funded IVF
programs so that they can be destroyed in tests of abortifacient drugs.
In other words, human life is being created for the express purpose
of destroying it.
Not even women who obtain abortions intend this result!
So much for the "tragic but necessary" theory!
Medicine Serving Desires.
In-vitro fertilization is another instance of medicine serving
people's wants instead of their needs or illnesses. As a 'service'
fulfilling needs, IVF has inevitably become an outright business venture
for many doctors with questionable ethics just as abortion has become,
and just as euthanasia just as inevitable will become.
Therefore, it was also unavoidable that unscrupulous operators should
exploit women in exactly the same manner that abortionists do.
Physicians and investigators have reported that many doctors prescribe
fertility drugs without even taking a woman's history, recommend painful
and expensive tests, and generally 'take' an infertile couple for all
they money they can.
Other examples of medicine as business include abortion and the
famous case of a woman golfer who had a healthy breast removed because
it interfered with her swing.
More Preferable Methods.
Many women who resort to IVF do not first check in to the
rapidly-growing field of alternative procedures that can actually
restore fertility in many or even most cases.
According to the executive director of the national
infertility-counseling organization Resolve, various micro-surgery
techniques can restore fertility to about 70 percent of all infertile
women. Dr. Joseph Ballina, Director of the Laser Research Institute
of New Orleans, has reported an 80 percent success rate in repairing
blocked or cut Fallopian tubes. After surgery, 80 percent of these women
subsequently become pregnant.
The repair of damaged Fallopian tubes is an example of medicine used
to repair an injury or pathological condition, unlike the IVF procedure.
In-vitro fertilization may interfere with natural selection
via two mechanisms. The eggs 'harvested' after stimulated ovulation may
not be those that would have been released during the natural course of
a woman's cycle. Even more importantly, the sperm that just happen to be
mixed with the egg(s) in a dish are almost certainly not those that
would have had to survive their rigorous and hazardous journey through
the female reproductive tract. Many scientists believe that as many as
40 percent of all sperm are damaged or abnormal, and that almost all of
these are screened out by the difficult trip through the uterus and
This is one of the reasons that most IVF clinics insist upon prenatal
diagnosis and abortion if the resulting baby is defective in any way. In
fact, the parents of the first IVF baby, Baby Louise, signed a contract
that required abortion if prenatal testing revealed their preborn
to be handicapped.
This type of contract is logical. After all, defective 'products'
would be bad for IVF publicity and business.
I can foresee the day when a human baby is born to a chimpanzee.
That might happen within 20 years.
IVF scientist in 1985.
The sanctity of the marriage vow is not only bypassed by the various
types of IVF procedures, it is shattered and the resulting fragments are
The Precursor: Artificial Insemination.
The first artificial insemination by donor (AID) procedure was
performed in 1884. An infertile but rich Philadelphia couple sensed that
there was some way to 'bypass' infertility and asked the assistance of
medical school professor Dr. William Pancoast. The good doctor in turn
asked the handsomest student in his class to contribute a sperm sample
and injected it into the wife while she was under general anesthesia.
She was not advised of the details of the procedure, but her husband
In AI, a sperm donor can masturbate three or four times a week for
$20 a shot, and does not care whether he has fathered dozens or even
hundreds of sons and daughters. AID, or artificial insemination by
donor, is technically adultery. The real father is unknown to the
mother, and neither 'partner' really cares about marriage.
Going 'All the Way.'
In artificial insemination, the precursor to IVF, only the male
gamete is isolated from the body. In the IVF procedure, both male and
female gametes are isolated from the body.
Embryo transfer takes this process one step further. An embryo that
is conceived (usually by AID) is removed and transferred to another
As reproductive technology 'progresses,' motherhood and fatherhood
are divided into successively smaller 'pieces.' One or more men may
donate sperm, one woman the egg, another the womb, and maybe a third the
actual raising of the child.
So a child may have a genetic mother, a gestational mother, an
adopting mother, a genetic father, and an adopting father. The various
reproductive technologies therefore lend new meaning to the term
'extended family,' as shown below;
THE EXTENDED FAMILIES OF KIDS BORN WITH REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES
With IVF Procedure;
A Child Has;
DS (donor sperm)
2 fathers and 1 mother
DO (donor ovum)
2 mothers and 1 father
DE (donor embryo)
2 fathers and 2 mothers
1 father and 2 mothers; or
2 fathers and
2 mothers; or
2 fathers and 3 mothers
The Ultimate Goal: EG.
The ultimate goal of this line of technology
is extracorporeal gestation (EG), in which a child is conceived in a
dish and gestated entirely outside the mother in an artificial uterus.
Late-term aborted babies have already been kept alive for days in
pressurized vessels. In fact, the Italian embryologist Daniele Petrucci
claims that he has kept a female embryo alive for 59 days in an
Many scientists and doctors, including Dr. Bernard Nathanson, believe
that an artificial womb will be perfected and functioning before the
year 2000. The implications of such technology as relating to the
abortion issue are fascinating to contemplate.
The ubiquitous pro-death 'bioethicist,' Joseph Fletcher, rather likes
the EG concept. According to him, "The womb is a dark and dangerous
place, a hazardous environment. We should want our potential children to
be where they can watched and protected as much as possible."
Isaac Asimov writes that if a woman could "... extrude the
fertilized ovum for development outside the body, she would then be no
more the victim of pregnancy than a man is."
The ultimate scenario that will be achieved by this line of research
has been seriously proposed by several prominent scientists. In their
ideal society, pregnancy will be abolished and everyone will be
surgically sterilized at the end of their teenaged years. Before the
sterilization process, however, girls will be superovulated and their
eggs harvested. Boys will masturbate once in order to produce a sperm
sample. The sperm and eggs will be carefully gene-mapped (presumably
enabled by the Genome Project, now in progress), and any samples that
are subnormal in any way will be discarded. When there is a projected
need for a scientist twenty years down the road, one will be conceived
and grown in an artificial uterus. When there is a projected need for a
negotiator, one will be grown. When there is a projected need for a
number of talented prostitutes, they too will be grown.
These are serious proposals, not just grist for science fiction pulp
novels. If it were possible to implement these scenarios today,
Fletcher, Asimov, and many others who think that pregnancy is
"victimization" would do so without hesitation. This colossal
arrogance allows the 'biocrats' to think that they can go God one
better. They think that they can improve upon His design by bettering
the "hazardous environment" that He created and by 'weeding
out' defective children.
But our God is a jealous God, and whenever man tries to equal Him,
there is always a backlash. That's simply the way He designed the
universe. You just don't mess with Mother Nature unless you want a
bloody nose or worse.
When will we ever learn this lesson?
The IVF Success Rate.
Senator Brian Harradine: "How often has in-vitro fertilization
been undertaken on non-human higher primates?"
Professor William Short: "It has not been undertaken on gorillas
because gorillas are an endangered species."
Senator Brian Harradine: "So you are able to do it on
Professor William Short: "We are not an endangered
From the transcript of the Australian Senate's Select Committee
hearings on the 1985 Human Embryo Experimentation Bill, reported by The
Tablet, November 22, 1986.
Effectiveness Per Cycle.
The chances of a single transplanted embryo
surviving the entire IVF process are quite slim. Therefore, the donor
woman routinely receives fertility drugs so that she produces several
eggs during ovulation. These multiple eggs are fertilized, and then
transferred to the receiving woman's uterus.
Despite the use of multiple eggs, the average probability of
pregnancy per cycle, according to a March 1989 study by the House Small
Business subcommittee, is only about 10 to 15 percent.
Effectiveness Per Embryo.
Pro-life activists object to in-vitro
fertilization primarily because it involves the intentional and
inevitable destruction of many human embryos for the sake of pure
efficiency. For example, only four percent of 14,585 human embryos
survived to birth in a 1984 European study, and another study done in
1987 at the United States' largest IVF center in Norfolk, Virginia,
concluded that only five percent of 4,500 embryos survived to birth.
Resulting embryos that appear to be defective in any way are simply
discarded as garbage. If a woman becomes pregnant with multiple embryos,
a 'doctor' will many times perform a "pregnancy reduction,"
which is a fancy way of describing selective abortion. The unwanted
children are killed with a shot of potassium chloride to the heart, and
they are simply reabsorbed by the mother's body.
Naturally, some other researchers hate to see all of these perfectly
good embryos go to waste, so they extract them alive and experiment upon
IVF and Pregnancy Reduction.
One of the many undesirable ethical situations that
fertility drugs and in-vitro fertilization (IVF) have created is
a 'need' for 'pregnancy reduction' abortions. During such a procedure,
the woman is deemed to be carrying too many unborn babies, and the
abortionist selectively kills one or more of them.
The United States Congress' Committee on Small Business found that
many unregulated IVF enterprises deliberately implant an excessive
number of embryos during transfer procedures just to increase their
chances of success;
IVF success rates are so discouraging that there are some
centers trying to do better in terms of creating babies by using
multiple [embryo] implants. It shows at the forty-one [leading] centers
there were an average of three embryos used. Some centers use more than
that. When they do, they sometimes create multiple pregnancies, three,
four, five, or six babies.
Then they use fetal reduction, which is killing some fetuses to
preserve the health of the mother and to help the other fetuses survive.
That is a serious procedure. But because of the lack of pressure to
standardize, routinize, and assure quality in the centers out there, we
have this kind of dubious activity going on out there.
The usual scenario develops when an infertile
woman receives fertility drugs and then is found to be carrying so many
babies that the doctor claims that her life or theirs may be endangered.
This is not always the case. In one instance, a doctor told a woman
that her five babies would all die, but she chose to carry them all to
term. They were all born healthy, and the entire family was the subject
of a 1991 People Magazine cover story.
As always, abortionists lean on the 'hard case' argument. Some women
seem to think that twins are too many kids, and abortionists
agree with them. So the 'mother's health' argument, in general, doesn't
hold up when you can 'reduce' twins to one child with a sort of
abominable reverse 'Sophie's choice.' In other words, the mother is not
selecting which of two children will live, but which will die.
Actually, all abortions can be justified with the same flimsy
arguments used to rationalize 'pregnancy reduction.' After all, most
abortions are just the reduction of one preborn baby to none.
In fact, most 'pregnancy reductions' are carried out to kill one of a
set of twins. Even in such apparently simple cases, 'pregnancy
reduction' is an abysmal failure at delivering its intended result. A
recent medical journal stated that; "The first six twin pregnancies
to undergo selective termination at Mount Sinai Hospital 'worked out
very badly,' with the unintended miscarriage of four unaffected fetuses
as well as the six targeted for abortion. These first attempts involved
the use of exsanguination [draining all of the blood from the unborn
babies] or injection of saline or an air embolism [to cause heart
attacks], Dr. Berkowitz said."
As with all immoral and cowardly acts of murder, Newspeak is required
to insulate the 'doctors' and the 'mothers' from the reality of what
they are actually doing. The term 'pregnancy reduction' is a case in
point. Others go even further in their self-deceptive language. Dr.
Seymour Romney suggests that the 'roulette killing' of some of the
babies in a multiple pregnancy be called "enhanced survival of
multifetal pregnancies," or ESMP for short.
The 'pregnancy reduction' procedure has been in use
for more than a decade now and is now generally standardized. A needle
is inserted through the mother's abdominal wall into her uterus and
potassium chloride is injected into the hearts of the 'surplus' babies
at random. They die and are reabsorbed by the mother's body.
Two doctors described the procedure in the New England Journal of
Medicine; "Using ultra-sound to locate each fetus, the doctors
would insert a needle into the chest cavity of the most accessible fetus
and place the needle tip directly into the heart of the baby. Potassium
chloride was then injected into the heart and the heart was viewed on
the ultrasound screen until it stopped beating. Even at 9 weeks, 3 of
the 12 fetuses selected for elimination presented problems. The heart
continued to beat and the procedure had to be repeated."
Other doctors described how they killed two of five babies in a
slightly different procedure; "At ten weeks gestation, a reduction
in the number of embryos was performed at the Clamart Clinic in Paris.
Guided by real-time ultrasonography and under abdominal local anesthesia
(lidocaine 1 percent), ten milliliters of amniotic fluid from each of
the two sacs was aspirated [drawn out] through a ten centimeter long,
21-gauge needle. The tip of the needle was then directed into the
thoracic [chest] cavity of the fetus and a mixture of 1 milliliter of
dolosal and 3 milliliters of xylocaine was injected. The needle was left
in place for up to ten minutes until cessation of cardiac activity was
seen. If the initial injection was unsuccessful, it was repeated after
The Psychological Impacts.
It would seem logical that the babies who
are lucky enough to avoid the random 'death needle' may suffer
extensively from 'survivor syndrome' when they grow up if they find out
about their narrow escape. This syndrome is typically found in children
whose parents chose to abort siblings. How much stronger will the
'survivor syndrome' be in children who escape death by mere millimeters,
children who, just by chance, are still alive, because they happened to
be in the right position when the killing took place? What sorrow will
they feel when they realize that their twin died to preserve their own
And what of the mother? The vast majority of women who undergo embryo
transfer or IVF have been infertile for an extended period of time and
spend an average of $11,000 for their assisted reproduction procedures.
They obviously want a baby in the worst possible way.
So, after a mother experiences the intense joy of realizing that she
is finally pregnant, she is then told that she has too many babies. She
has to lie on her back for at least twenty minutes while a needle
pierces her abdomen and womb and injects poison into one or more of her
baby's hearts. Some of her children will die because of the off-chance
that their existence may compromise the health of her other children.
What will this experience do to these poor mothers?
Brave New World.
Sooner or later one human society or another will launch out on
this adventure, whether the rest of mankind approves or not. If this
happens, and a superior race emerges with greater intelligence and
longer life, how will these people look upon those who are lagging
behind? One thing is certain: They, not we, will be the heirs to the
future, and they will assume control.
The abuses that are possible with IVF (abuses that
therefore will certainly occur), are manifold and strain the
imagination. However, they are an inevitable and (un)natural outgrowth
of the mentality that undergirded the early research and experimentation
Defining Early Objections.
The moral objections to early IVF
experimentation were even more pronounced than they are now due to the
initial extraordinarily high embryo wastage rate and the dubious nature
of early research.
Doctors Edwards and Steptoe, who produced Louise Brown, the world's
first "test tube" baby, discarded 99.5% of their fertilized
ova over a period of 12 years. This means that they had failed in the
first 200 attempts at transferring the embryo to the uterus.
Steptoe's IVF research had been wholly financed by his very lucrative
abortion practice. Steptoe required the parents to agree to abort if
there was the slightest hint of an abnormality in Louise, in order not
to sully the reputation of the new science. It would be interesting to
know how Louise, now a teenager, would react to the knowledge that she
would have been disposed of as so much garbage if she had been less than
perfect or to the realization that 200 embryos before she had a chance
This eugenics attitude has been passed down to latter-day IVF
clinics. For example, Noel Keane, director of the largest surrogate
motherhood service in the world (New York's Infertility Center), has his
applicants for surrogate motherhood sign contracts stating that their
children will be genetically tested and aborted if defective.
We certainly can't have the reputation of the 'service' tarnished
now, can we?
Nobel Prize laureate James Watson has stretched this 'logic' to its
natural conclusion. He asserts that doctors who participate in IVF
should be present at the birth of all of their babies so that they may
"... terminate the baby's life should it come out grossly
Many scientists, drunk with the euphoria of
treading where no human has dared go before, are plunging headlong into
lines of research that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. In
addition to arcane knowledge, they have also acquired a dangerous
elitist attitude. As one leading researcher boasted, "[Scientists]
have the right to exercise their professional activities to the limit
... as lay attitudes struggle to catch up with what scientists can
In other words, ethics and morals, along with judgment, have been
sacrificed in order to advance the mad dash for knowledge. This
philosophy has destroyed all limits, so that now the rule is:
IF IT CAN BE DONE, IT MUST BE DONE,
AND DAMN THE CONSEQUENCES.
For example, if researchers continue along current lines of inquiry,
it will soon be possible for a woman to conceive and bear her own
(younger) identical twin sister; it will be possible to allow human
embryos to gestate in apes of various species (or even in bovines) in
order to bypass the legal barriers now springing up against surrogate
motherhood; and it may well soon be possible to fulfill the
long-standing homosexual fantasy of male pregnancy.
Where Are We Being Led?
The noted French biologist Dr. Jean Rostand
wrote in all seriousness a few years ago that "Here and now Homo
Sapiens is in the process of becoming Homo Biologicus, a strange biped
that will combine the properties of self-reproduction without males,
like the green fly; of fertilizing his female at long distance, like the
nautiloid mollusk; of changing sex, like the xiphores; of growing from
cuttings, like the earthworm; of replacing his missing parts, like the
newt; of developing outside his mother's body, like the kangaroo; and of
hibernating, like the hedgehog."
These are not the mad pipe dreams of some isolated quack. Many
leading scientists have advocated the creation of chimeras part-human
and part-animal or plant creatures whose usefulness for various purposes
would be enhanced by their new 'qualities.'
Dr. Robert C. Gesteland, an associate professor of biological
sciences at Northwestern University in Illinois, has suggested (1)
crossing man with plants, so all we'd need for food would be water and
sunlight; (2) developing a servant class of supersmart apes; and (3)
best of all, breeding a race of humans only four inches tall, which
would lessen pollution and conserve natural resources.
Watch Out for Leo the Housecat!
It's funny how educated people often
don't think about the practical aspects of their hopes and dreams.
Presumably, if Gesteland's dreams came true, (1) we could pass up a
McDonald's and simply graze at the side of the road, (2) we would create
and enslave another species, and (3) we would shrink ourselves to the
point where pigeons would become our predators and housecats would be
comparatively as large as elephants.
Dr. George Haldane (the late British geneticist) predicted that we
might breed a race of legless humanoid mutants with prehensile tails or
feet for space travel. Other scientists would like to see women laying
eggs that could be hatched or eaten (i.e., use our own young as a
food source); human beings with gills to facilitate underwater travel;
and people with two sets of arms and hands, one for heavy work, the
other for lighter tasks.
We are already most of the way down Gerald Leach's "Ladder of
Unnaturalness." Herds of prime cattle embryos are flown across the
Atlantic Ocean in the wombs of female rabbits. Lesbians are now making
men superfluous with sperm banks. The exploitation of women as
'wombs-for-hire' is the first step towards parthenogenesis and actual
The Advantages of Alternative Procedures.
Gamete Intra-Fallopian Transfer (GIFT) is totally distinct from
other procedures in that the woman's egg is fertilized inside her body.
In other techniques such as in-vitro fertilization, human sperm
and eggs are essentially mixed in a glass dish and the
already-fertilized egg(s) are then implanted into the uterus.
In a GIFT procedure, doctors incise the Fallopian tube at a point
past any blockage and, using a laparoscope, place the woman's egg and
man's sperm inside the tube. If conception does occur, the pregnancy
will proceed in the usual manner the fertilized egg will travel down the
Fallopian tube and will hopefully implant in the uterus.
GIFT is currently one of the few anti-infertility surgical procedures
morally acceptable to the Catholic Church and most Bible-believing
Protestant churches, because it does not involve questionable ethical
practices such as masturbation to obtain the sperm or the discarding of
'excess' fertilized eggs.
GIFT has a 20% to 30% success rate, compared to IVF's 15% overall
success rate, and a single GIFT procedure is comparable in cost to IVF
at about $3,000 to $4,000.
Low Tube Ovum Transfer (LTOT) is also an
acceptable technology for Catholics and members of many other faiths.
This procedure relocates the woman's egg past the damaged portion of her
Fallopian tube so that in vivo (in the body) fertilization takes
Other procedures acceptable to almost all faiths include
"assisted semination" (not artificial insemination) and Sperm
Intrafallopian Transfer (SIFT).
References: In-Vitro Fertilization and Related Reproductive Technologies.
In the year 4545, ain't gonna need no husband, won't need your
wife, you'll pick your son, pick your daughter too, from the bottom of a
Song entitled "In the Year 2525."
 C.S. Lewis. The Abolition of Man. New York: Macmillan
Publishers, 1965. Page 63.
 'Bioethicist' Joseph Fletcher. "Ethical Aspects of Genetic
Controls." New England Journal of Medicine (285:776-783,
1971). Available as Reprint #104 from the Institute of Society, Ethics
and the Life Sciences, Hastings-On-Hudson, New York 10706.
 Sign hanging on an IVF clinic waiting room wall. Described in
Michael Gold. "The Baby Makers." Science Magazine,
April 1985, pages 26 to 38.
 Albert S. Moraczewski., O.P. "In vitro Fertilization
and Christian Marriage." Also Eugene Diamond, M.D. "A Call for
Moratorium on in-vitro Fertilization." Both articles are in
the November 1979 issue of Linacre Quarterly.
 Parade Magazine, July 2, 1989, page 19.
 Claudia Wallis. "The New Origins of Life." Time
Magazine, September 10, 1984. Page 40. Also Jo Wiles. "The Gift of
Life." Star World, April 24, 1986. Pages 24 to 26.
 Bernard Haring. Ethics of Manipulation. New York: Seabury
Press, 1975. Pages 198 and 199.
 Gary Potter. "Intra Urbem Extraque." The
Wanderer, May 18, 1989, page 3.
 Robert W. Rebar et al. "Are We Exploiting the
Infertile Couple?" Fertility and Sterility, November 1987,
page 735. Also see Sevgi O. Aral and Willard Cates. "The Increasing
Concern With Infertility: Why Now?" Journal of the American
Medical Association, November 4, 1983, pages 2,330.
 George Will. "Abortion as Commodity, Not Medicine." The
Human Life Review, Fall 1978, pages 73 and 74.
 Beverly Freeman, Executive Director of the infertility
organization Resolve, quoted in Claudia Wallis. "The New Origins of
Life." Time Magazine, September 10, 1984, page 40.
 "In-vitro Lab Approved." National Right to
Life News, January 1980, page 23.
 Donald DeMarco, Ph.D. In My Mother's Womb: The Catholic
Church's Defense of Natural Life. Manassas, Virginia: Trinity
Communications. 1987, 234 pages.
 IVF scientist, quoted in "Creating Monsters." TFP
Newsletter, 4.11 (1985), page 10.
 Robert Francoeur. Utopian Motherhood: New Trends in Human
Reproduction. London: George Allen & Unwin. 1971, pages 11 to
 Tom Paskal. "Tampering with the Machinery of God." Weekend
Magazine, September 18, 1971, page 7. Also see Bernard Nathanson, M.D. Aborting
America. Garden City, New Jersey: Doubleday Press, 1979. Page 282.
 Joseph Fletcher. The Ethics of Genetic Control. Garden
City, New Jersey: Doubleday Press, 1979. Page 103.
 Isaac Asimov. "On Designing a Woman." Viva
Magazine, November 1973, page 8.
 Edward Grossman. "The Obsolescent Mother: A Scenario."
Atlantic Magazine, May 1971, page 49. Also see Shulasmith
Firestone. The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution.
New York: William Morrow, 1972, page 238.
 Committee on Small Business. Consumer Protection Issues
Involved in In-Vitro Fertilization Clinics. Washington, D.C.:
United States Government Printing Office, 1988. Pages 26 and 27.
 "Selective Abortion in Multiple Gestation." Obstetrics
and Gynecology News, August 1-14, 1989.
 As quoted in Debra Evans. Without Moral Limits: Women,
Reproduction, and the New Medical Technology. Westchester, Illinois:
Crossway Books, 1989. Page 116.
 "Selective Abortion, AKA Pregnancy Reduction." New
England Journal of Medicine, April 21, 1988.
 Rene Frydman et al. "Reduction of the Number of
Embryos in a Multiple Pregnancy: From Quintuplet to Triplet." Fertility
and Sterility, August 1987, pages 326 and 327.
 A. Rosenfeld. The Second Genesis: The Coming Control of Life.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1969. Page 145.
 Eugene Diamond, M.D. "A Call for Moratorium on in-vitro
Fertilization." Linacre Quarterly, November 1979.
 Time Magazine, July 31, 1978.
 Claudia Wallis. "A Surrogate's Story." Time
Magazine, September 10, 1984, page 51.
 James Watson. "Child From the Laboratory." Prism
(American Medical Association), May 1973, Volume 1, Number 2, page 13.
 Paul Ramsey, Ph.D. "On in-vitro Fertilization."
Human Life Review, Winter 1979, pages 17 to 30.
 R.G. Edwards and D.J. Sharpe. "Social Values and Research
in Human Embryology." Nature 231:87-91(1971).
 David Q. Liptak. "Catholic Hospital begins 'In Vivo' Ovum
Transfers." The Catholic Standard and Times, September 22,
1983. Page 14. Also David Q. Liptak. "New 'Infertility Bypass (LTOT)'
Assessed." Catholic Transcript, January 6, 1984.
 Orville N. Griese. "Promising Approaches to Human
Infertility." International Review of Natural Family Planning,
Fall 1986. Pages 243 to 255.
Further Reading: In-Vitro Fertilization and Related Reproductive Technologies.
Bruce L. Anderson. The Price of a Perfect Baby: What Christians
Should Know About the Genetic Revolution, Test-Tube Babies, Surrogate
Motherhood, and Selective Genetics. Originally entitled Let Us
Bethany House Publishers, 6820 Auto Club Road,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55438. 1984, 181 pages. This book deals with the
Christian attitude toward the reproductive revolution, and discusses new
questions: Should man create and destroy life in the laboratory? Does
surrogate motherhood constitute a violation of God's laws? What impacts
do these new technologies have on the family? Is the practice of making
babies without pregnancy acceptable?
Apropos, Volume 5.
A.S. Fraser, Editor, Burnbrae, Staffin Road,
Portree, Isle of Skye, Scotland, IV51 9HP, United Kingdom. This is a
magazine devoted to developments in the European Catholic Church.
Lately, the European Church has become deeply embroiled in the
continuing controversy over fertility science, including various forms
of in-vitro fertilization.
Lesley and John Brown with Sue Freeman. Our Miracle Called Louise:
A Parents' Story.
Reddington Press, 1979. 188 pages. Reviewed by
Sharon Effrein Donehey on page 8 of the February 8, 1982 issue of National
Right to Life News. A rather simplistic and unenlightening look at
the events surrounding the world's first 'test-tube' baby.
Gena Corea. The Mother Machine: Reproductive Technologies from
Artificial Insemination to Artificial Wombs.
New York: Harper &
Row, 1985; New York: Harper & Row Perennial Library, 1986. 374
pages. Hardback, softcover. Reviewed by Leslie Bond in the November 6,
1986 National Right to Life News. This book discusses the various
drawbacks to reproductive technologies, including in-vitro
fertilization and embryo transfer. However, the author warns in her
introduction that she is extremely anti-male, and this sexist attitude
mars her presentation rather badly, because all problems are portrayed
as the fault of men. Strangely, she emphasizes the hazards of getting
pregnant artificially, but totally ignores any and all of the dangers
associated with getting unpregnant artificially (i.e., abortion).
Donald DeMarco, Ph.D. Biotechnology and the Assault on Parenthood.
Ignatius Press, 1991, 269 pages. Reviewed on page 45 of the
August-September 1991 issue of ALL About Issues. The author
examines the various types of assisted-reproduction technologies,
including in-vitro fertilization, gamete intra-fallopian transfer
(GIFT), and self-insemination ("marriage for one"). This book
is heavy on the ethical and spiritual aspects of advanced reproductive
technologies, and provides a very good foundation for discussion of
Donald DeMarco, Ph.D. In My Mother's Womb: The Church's Defense of
Hardcover, paperback. Order from: Life Issues
Bookshelf, Sun Life, Thaxton, Virginia 24174, telephone: (703) 586-4898.
An eloquent defense of the Catholic Church's defense of human life. An
examination of abortion's languages and perspective, the unborn,
contraception and bio-engineering. Also covered are the Church's
perspective on new technologies, including in-vitro
fertilization, surrogate motherhood, fetal experimentation, and genetic
engineering. See especially Chapter 1, "Abortion and Church
Teaching," pages 7 to 25, "Abortion and Bio-Engineering,"
pages 82 to 88, and "In Vitro Fertilization," pages 143
Sherman Elias. M.D., and George J. Annas, J.D. Reproductive
Genetics & the Law.
Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, Inc.
1987, 310 pages. The medical and legal backgrounds of some of the
hottest topics in artificial reproductive technologies today: Newborn
genetic screening, genetic counseling, prenatal diagnosis, treatment
(and nontreatment) of handicapped newborns, "noncoital
reproduction," frozen embryos, and gene and fetal therapy.
Debra Evans. Without Moral Limits: Women, Reproduction, and the
New Medical Technology.
Westchester, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1989.
288 pages. See especially Chapter 5, "Egg Harvesting and Embryo
Experimentation: Lab-Oriented Concepts," pages 68 to 81, and
Chapter 6, "Infertility Diagnosis and Treatment: To Catch a Falling
Star," pages 84 to 97; Chapter 7, "In-vitro
Fertilization and Embryo Transfer: Sex in a Dish?," pages 100 to
117; and Chapter 8, "Embryo Transplants: The By-Products of
Manufactured Conception," pages 120 to 137.
Greenhaven Press. Biomedical Ethics: Opposing Viewpoints.
Greenhaven Press Opposing Viewpoints Series, Post Office Box 289009, San
Diego, California 92128-9009. 1987, 216 pages. Each section includes
several essays by leading authorities on both sides of each issue. The
questions asked are: "Is Genetic Engineering Ethical?;"
"Are Organ Transplants Ethical?;" "Should Limits Be
Placed On Reproductive Technology?;" "Should Animals Be Used
in Scientific Research?;" and "What Ethical Standards Should
Guide the Health Care System?" Authors include Tibor R. Macan,
Malcolm Muggeridge, and the Ethics Committee of the American Fertility
Society. A catalog is available from the above address and can be
obtained by calling 1-(800) 231-5163.
Greenhaven Press. Science and Religion: Opposing Viewpoints.
Volume I. Greenhaven Press Opposing Viewpoints Series, Post Office Box
289009, San Diego, California 92128-9009. 1988, 233 pages. Each section
includes several essays by leading authorities on both sides of each
issue: "Great Historical Debates on Science and Religion;"
"Are Science and Religion Compatible?;" "How Did the
Universe Originate?;" "How Did Life Originate?;" and
"Should Ethical Values Limit Scientific Research?" Authors
include Clarence Darrow, William Jennings Bryan, The Roman Curia,
Bertrand Russell, and the National Academy of Sciences. A catalog is
available from the above address and can be obtained by calling 1-(800)
Ted Howard and Jeremy Rifkin. Who Should Play God?
Publishing Company, 272 pages. Reviewed by Doug Badger on page 22 of the
March 1980 National Right to Life News. An excellent primer for
pro-lifers that holds that the test-tube baby is just the beginning of a
cascade of biotechnological horrors that may soon engulf and destroy
whatever is left of medical ethics.
D. Gareth Jones. Brave New People: Ethical Issues at the
Commencement of Life.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 255 Jefferson
Avenue SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503, telephone: (616) 459-4591.
1985, 225 pages. This book was so 'controversial' (which means that
Leftist censors didn't like it), that it was withdrawn from the market
after its original release in 1984. The author addresses complicated
issues that apply to the beginning of human life: In-vitro
fertilization, artificial insemination, cloning, and genetic tinkering.
Carol Levine (Editor). Taking Sides: Clashing Views on
Controversial Bio-Ethical Issues.
Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc.,
Guilford, Connecticut. 1984, 297 pages. Leading thinkers on both sides
of bioethical issues express their opinions in scholarly essays on
subjects including abortion, In-vitro fertilization, surrogate
motherhood, involuntary sterilization of the retarded, informed consent,
active euthanasia, withholding treatment from handicapped newborns,
suicide, the insanity defense, animal experimentation, prisoners
volunteering for research, justifiable deception in research, organ
harvesting from the dead, and genetic engineering. A good primer on the
J. Robert Nelson. Human Life: A Biblical Perspective for Bioethics.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1984, 194 pages. Reviewed by James Manney
on pages 9 and 15 of the October 24, 1985 National Right to Life News.
The author contrasts the philosophies and resulting actions of
bioethicists who are believers and those who are not.
Paul Ramsey, Ph.D. "Shall We "Reproduce?"
I: The Medical Ethics of in-vitro Fertilization. Part II:
Rejoinders and Future Forecast." Journal of the American Medical
Association, June 5, 1972, pages 1,346 to 1,350, and June 12, 1972,
pages 1,480 to 1,485. Available as Reprint #613 from the Institute of
Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York
10706 (The Hastings Center).
Sean O'Reilly, M.D. Bioethics and the Limits of Science.
Christendom College Press, Route 3, Box 87, Front Royal, Virginia 22630.
1980, 176 pages. Reviewed by Robert E. Joyce, Ph.D. in the Fall 1980
issue of the International Review of Natural Family Planning,
pages 274 to 276. Recommended for college students working in a
Christian context. This book covers the definition of life and person,
how technology has complicated the debate, the norms of bioethics, the
definition of death, and a description of false and true humanist ethics
and the foundation of Christian ethics and the authority of the Church.
Peter Singer and Deane Wells. Making Babies: The New Science and
Ethics of Conception.
New York: Charles Scribner and Sons. 1985, 245
pages. Reviewed by William May in the October 24, 1985 issue of National
Right to Life News. This is an enthusiastically pro-in-vitro
treatise by two people who laugh at the idea that the preborn are human.
Anyone who opposes IVF technology for any reason is automatically
labeled "irrational," "undemocratic," and
"obscurantist" (you can always quickly identify a typical
intolerant and judgmental pro-abort, because they invariably whine and
call people who disagree with them nasty and fancy names). In fact, the
authors state that IVF is what sets us apart from animals not free will,
but the ability to manipulate technology. They also state baldly that
anyone who thinks humans are superior to animals in any way is guilty of
the heinous sin of "speciesism!" This book is a classic
example of the mentality that assert, "if it can be done, it must
be done." Shows how so-called 'bioethicists' lend a veneer of
respectability to biological atrocities.
United States Government. Artificial Insemination: Practice in the
United States, Summary of a 1987 Survey.
Covers the extent of AI in
the United States, the patterns of donor and recipient screening for
genetic and infectious diseases, and the economic and other obstacles to
performing AI. Serial Number 052-003101129-8, 1988, 120 pages. Order by
mail from Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by telephone from (202) 783-3238.
United States Government. Infertility: Medical and Social Choices
Illustrates a range of options for Congressional action in
nine principle areas of public policy related to infertility, collecting
data on reproductive issues, infertility services, transfer of human
eggs and sperm, and embryos, surrogate motherhood, and reproductive
research. Serial Number 052-003-01100-0, 1988, 38 pages. Order by mail
from Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by telephone from (202) 783-3238.
United States Government. Mapping Our Genes, The Genome Projects:
How Big, How Fast?
Focuses on how to assess the rationales for
conducting human genome projects, how to fund them, how to coordinate
scientific and technical programs, and international impacts and
repercussions. Serial Number 052-003-01106-9, 1988, 224 pages. Order by
mail from Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by telephone from (202) 783-3238.
United States Government, Committee on Government Operations. Medical
and Social Choices for Infertile Couples and the Federal Role in
Prevention and Treatment.
Washington, DC: United States Government
Printing Office, 1989.
Robert M. Veatch. A Theory of Medical Ethics.
New York: Basic
Books, 1981. 387 pages. Reviewed by Joseph M. Boyle, Jr., on page 19 of
the January 6, 1983 issue of National Right to Life News. The
author attempts to construct a parallel pro-life framework of medical
ethics that can be applied in all or most of the many new areas of
bioethics that are being explored today.
© American Life League BBS — 1-703-659-7111
This is a chapter of the Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia published
by American Life League.