An ethical question for the "embryos are people" crowd

[Vee]

Here's an ethical scenario - from my own life - for those of you who consider embryos to be people:

When my ex-wife and I were together, we tried to have kids to no avail. She kept miscarrying before we could get to the third month of gestation.

We went to see a fertility doctor. The doctor told us right off the bat that because she was working out of a Catholic hospital, she wouldn't be able to prescribe IVF.

... but we described what was going on and here's the approach that she ended up recommending:

Just keep trying. Keep trying with lots of monitoring to figure out what's going on: one cycle we might be able to get to 6 weeks, the next 8, and then further and further until - hopefully - we would get to a full term live birth. Every cycle, we'd just tweak medications and whatnot to get a little bit further along.

Now...I personally had no problem with this approach (which ended up not working - we didn't end up having kids), but it did occur to me that it was absolutely wild that the Catholic hospital where we were going would be okay with this.

I mean, imagine you had a house where kids kept dying mysteriously. It would be monstrous for someone to suggest "hey - let's just keep sending kids in, but strap wireless cameras to them so we can try to figure out what's killing them."

It seems to me that anyone who really did think that an embryo is a person - and who wasn't a complete hypocrite or psychopath - should have said something like "your pattern of miscarriages means there's too much risk for the next embryo. Stop trying to get pregnant."

So... thoughts?

I've posted a poll. Along with voting, please post your reasons why you voted the way you did in the thread below.

First of all, I'm very sorry you and your wife had to go through that experience. It must have been really hard.

Although I consider an embryo a person, I think good sense needs to be taken into account. After everything that happened, "keep trying" is equivalent to saying "keep suffering". That's not a solution.
You remind me of something that happened to a friend of mine years ago. She had a baby who was born seemingly normal, but they quickly realized that something was wrong because she wasn't developing properly. It took 2 years to reach a diagnosis. She had a very rare metabolic disease with a 100% fatality rate (she died when she was 7). After many tests they found that the baby was born like that because both parents shared the gene that causes that disease. Still, one day I went with my friend to the hospital (this hospital had no religious affiliation) and I heard one of the doctors tell her that she should try to have another baby - with a 50% chance of the child having the same disease! I couldn't believe it. It wasn't my place to say anything so I bit my tongue, but in the car my friend told me she would prefer to commit suicide than taking the chance of having another child go through so much suffering. A few years after her daughter died she adopted a healthy boy who needed a family and they made this plan B work.

 

[Truthseeker]

Just so you know, there is a scripture in the Hebrew portion (commonly known as the Old Testament, a misnomer, however) that if a mother loses an unborn child due to malice, the offender is to be put to death. Thus it is to be concluded that even an unborn child's life is precious to God. Exodus 21: “If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges.23 But if a fatality does occur, then you must give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, blow for blow."

You're a Christian, not a Hebrew or Jew, so why does this law that Moses gave apply to Christians? I have a different opinion about about a law given by an earlier religion applying to a later religion as a Baha'i.

Also, where's the malice? That's left unanswered. I'm not saying the law was wrong for it's time, just wondering why you think these verses indicate malice by the person who is not the husband.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're a Christian, not a Hebrew or Jew, so why does this law that Moses gave apply to Christians? I have a different opinion about about a law given by an earlier religion applying to a later religion as a Baha'i.

Also, where's the malice? That's left unanswered. I'm not saying the law was wrong for it's time, just wondering why you think these verses indicate malice by the person who is not the husband.

Many Christians believe that they are the successors to the Jews and that those laws apply to them. Though most do tend to pick and choose which laws they follow.

 

[Truthseeker]

Many Christians believe that they are the successors to the Jews and that those laws apply to them. Though most do tend to pick and choose which laws they follow.

I do think they tend to pick and choose, I agree.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Here's an ethical scenario - from my own life - for those of you who consider embryos to be people:

When my ex-wife and I were together, we tried to have kids to no avail. She kept miscarrying before we could get to the third month of gestation.

We went to see a fertility doctor. The doctor told us right off the bat that because she was working out of a Catholic hospital, she wouldn't be able to prescribe IVF.

... but we described what was going on and here's the approach that she ended up recommending:

Just keep trying. Keep trying with lots of monitoring to figure out what's going on: one cycle we might be able to get to 6 weeks, the next 8, and then further and further until - hopefully - we would get to a full term live birth. Every cycle, we'd just tweak medications and whatnot to get a little bit further along.

Now...I personally had no problem with this approach (which ended up not working - we didn't end up having kids), but it did occur to me that it was absolutely wild that the Catholic hospital where we were going would be okay with this.

I mean, imagine you had a house where kids kept dying mysteriously. It would be monstrous for someone to suggest "hey - let's just keep sending kids in, but strap wireless cameras to them so we can try to figure out what's killing them."

It seems to me that anyone who really did think that an embryo is a person - and who wasn't a complete hypocrite or psychopath - should have said something like "your pattern of miscarriages means there's too much risk for the next embryo. Stop trying to get pregnant."

So... thoughts?

I've posted a poll. Along with voting, please post your reasons why you voted the way you did in the thread below.

If I had children who kept dying for any reason (besides neglect or abuse on my part) - I see nothing unethical or immoral about continuing to try to have children.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If I had children who kept dying for any reason (besides neglect or abuse on my part) - I see nothing unethical or immoral about continuing to try to have children.

You see nothing immoral about sending children to their likely death?

 

[Sheldon]

If I had children who kept dying for any reason (besides neglect or abuse on my part) - I see nothing unethical or immoral about continuing to try to have children.

So the suffering of those children wouldn't give you moral pause then?

 

[Luchito Prays]

Here's an ethical scenario - from my own life - for those of you who consider embryos to be people:

When my ex-wife and I were together, we tried to have kids to no avail. She kept miscarrying before we could get to the third month of gestation.

We went to see a fertility doctor. The doctor told us right off the bat that because she was working out of a Catholic hospital, she wouldn't be able to prescribe IVF.

... but we described what was going on and here's the approach that she ended up recommending:

Just keep trying. Keep trying with lots of monitoring to figure out what's going on: one cycle we might be able to get to 6 weeks, the next 8, and then further and further until - hopefully - we would get to a full term live birth. Every cycle, we'd just tweak medications and whatnot to get a little bit further along.

Now...I personally had no problem with this approach (which ended up not working - we didn't end up having kids), but it did occur to me that it was absolutely wild that the Catholic hospital where we were going would be okay with this.

I mean, imagine you had a house where kids kept dying mysteriously. It would be monstrous for someone to suggest "hey - let's just keep sending kids in, but strap wireless cameras to them so we can try to figure out what's killing them."

It seems to me that anyone who really did think that an embryo is a person - and who wasn't a complete hypocrite or psychopath - should have said something like "your pattern of miscarriages means there's too much risk for the next embryo. Stop trying to get pregnant."

So... thoughts?

I've posted a poll. Along with voting, please post your reasons why you voted the way you did in the thread below.

Well, definitively the whole attempts were to keep the embryo (the person) alive,and to develop enough for you to have a baby. The Catholic hospital was doing the right thing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, definitively the whole attempts were to keep the embryo (the person) alive,and to develop enough for you to have a baby. The Catholic hospital was doing the right thing.

They were being inconsistent.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

You see nothing immoral about sending children to their likely death?

As a parent who has lost a child - my first born - I find this line of argument offensive.

Look - I'm not trying to downplay, doubt or denigrate your personal experiences - but asking this question at a time when it can only be used as a "poke" at Christians or others who believe that life begins at conception - is at the very least insensitive.

I have had four children since I lost my first - and I am very grateful for them and find a lot of joy in them - and it is true that they could die at any time - but that is true of anyone.

We shouldn't be too afraid of death that we avoid living our lives. Or avoid giving others a chance at life.

A part of our lives is to procreate - I believe it to be an essential aspect of our time in mortality - and we may lose children along the way - but at least they got to live - even if only as an embryo.

I personally believe that one of the most important purposes of mortality is for the spirit children of God to receive physical bodies and experience the rigors of mortal life.

However - there are some choice spirits that are so close to perfection already - without ever experiencing mortality - that all they truly need from this life is a physical body.

I believe that all children that die before they reach the age of accountability - where they can discern Good from Evil and commit sin - are pure and innocent - therefore - they return to the Father.

No judgment required.

And also that the time will come where all parents who lose their children will have an opportunity - sometime after this mortal life - when they will be able to raise those children to maturity - after their Resurrection.

I believe with all my heart that my Jacob still lives - that he was glad to come into this world - even if it was for a short time - and that I will see him again.

Please don't tread on the hearts and beliefs of others to score political points.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

So the suffering of those children wouldn't give you moral pause then?

You cannot predict any future suffering.

Besides - isn't mortal life - in general - suffering?

 

[crossfire]

Here's an ethical scenario - from my own life - for those of you who consider embryos to be people:

When my ex-wife and I were together, we tried to have kids to no avail. She kept miscarrying before we could get to the third month of gestation.

We went to see a fertility doctor. The doctor told us right off the bat that because she was working out of a Catholic hospital, she wouldn't be able to prescribe IVF.

... but we described what was going on and here's the approach that she ended up recommending:

Just keep trying. Keep trying with lots of monitoring to figure out what's going on: one cycle we might be able to get to 6 weeks, the next 8, and then further and further until - hopefully - we would get to a full term live birth. Every cycle, we'd just tweak medications and whatnot to get a little bit further along.

Now...I personally had no problem with this approach (which ended up not working - we didn't end up having kids), but it did occur to me that it was absolutely wild that the Catholic hospital where we were going would be okay with this.

I mean, imagine you had a house where kids kept dying mysteriously. It would be monstrous for someone to suggest "hey - let's just keep sending kids in, but strap wireless cameras to them so we can try to figure out what's killing them."

It seems to me that anyone who really did think that an embryo is a person - and who wasn't a complete hypocrite or psychopath - should have said something like "your pattern of miscarriages means there's too much risk for the next embryo. Stop trying to get pregnant."

So... thoughts?

I've posted a poll. Along with voting, please post your reasons why you voted the way you did in the thread below.

Question: what would have happened if your ex-wife was unable to get the drugs for after-treatment of a miscarriage? With the new Texas setup allowing anyone to sue someone for abetting an abortion, pharmacists are now refusing to fill prescriptions for miscarriage aftercare drugs because these same drugs are used in medically induced abortions, and they don't what to risk getting sued by anyone looking to make a quick $10k.