The embryo moral dilemma - an update

Update of information is at the end of this post......

There are an estimated 600,000 embryos in limbo in American laboratories and IVF centres.

They are unwanted, surplus to requirements, an embarrassment - but not to God.

The dilemma is, what to do with them?

They are individual lives so they cannot be destroyed, although I doubt if many IVF Directors are too worried about that.

Now, there is a move by some Christian groups to 'adopt' them, for women to place themselves in the role of a prospective mother and to be implanted with the embryos.

We know, do we not, that the end, in terms of abiding by Catholic doctrine, can never justify the means but, for the life of me I cannot see a logical solution other than 'adoption'.

The Daily Mail (ugh) reports that: 

"While conservative Christians and the Catholic Church have long opposed abortion, they diverge when it comes to embryo adoption.

This is because the Catholic Church is fundamentally opposed to IVF treatments, saying 'It needs to be recognised that the thousands of abandoned embryos represent a situation of injustice that cannot be resolved,' said Vatican theologians in a 2008 bioethics treatise".

Perhaps a Canon Lawyer or a Theologian or both would like to comment?

Update...

Thanks to a friend for his message via FB and to several comments left on the last post.

There is some debate concerning 'allowing the embryos to die'.
Presumably, this would mean removing them from their frozen status.

Of course, one also assumes that the Sacrament of Baptism would be bestowed upon them.

So far so good but this solution seems akin to me of leaving an elderly ill person without food or water so that their death is accelerated.

Death by neglect might be the term used.

It would be good to see this issue raised in a more respectable public arena than this blog......something from the Vatican perhaps?

Moral dilemma...what to do with the embryos?

There are an estimated 600,000 embryos in limbo in American laboratories and IVF centres.

They are unwanted, surplus to requirements, an embarrassment - but not to God.

The dilemma is, what to do with them?

They are individual lives so they cannot be destroyed, although I doubt if many IVF Directors are too worried about that.

Now, there is a move by some Christian groups to 'adopt' them, for women to place themselves in the role of a prospective mother and to be implanted with the embryos.

We know, do we not, that the end, in terms of abiding by Catholic doctrine, can never justify the means but, for the life of me I cannot see a logical solution other than 'adoption'.

The Daily Mail (ugh) reports that: 

"While conservative Christians and the Catholic Church have long opposed abortion, they diverge when it comes to embryo adoption.

This is because the Catholic Church is fundamentally opposed to IVF treatments, saying 'It needs to be recognised that the thousands of abandoned embryos represent a situation of injustice that cannot be resolved,' said Vatican theologians in a 2008 bioethics treatise".

Perhaps a Canon Lawyer or a Theologian or both would like to comment?

A moral dilemma......what would happen if.....

.....for example, the British Government banned all In-Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) procedures. With immediate effect.

Hats in the air you might say. Possibly a first step towards abolishing abortion.

Well, let's face it, it's unlikely to happen, in the near future certainly.

But the question is...if it did happen, what would the Church say regarding the thousands of embryos held in frozen suspension?

How would we, the Government or the Church decide on the future of such embryos.

Would it be licit to implant them?

Surely we could not destroy them?

Help!


PRAYER REQUEST:

Please pray for a 3 year old niece who has just been diagnosed with leukemia and who has been taken into hospital today, thank you.

A moral dilemma (and a cat is involved)

As a Catholic am I entitled to kill a neighbour's cat because it is stalking my bantams? What would St Thomas Aquinas have to say on the matter I wonder?

This is the moral dilemma facing me (the topical one at any rate).

If I shot this marauding moggy it would equate with breaking the 'Thou shalt not steal' commandment but what other options do I have?

I know that if I approach my neighbour and make a case for restricting the cat in some way it will be met with a point blank refusal; a cat is, after all, a free agent able to roam the fields and hedgerows as it will. Fences will not contain it. The only solution would be for the neighbour to make the cat a 'house cat', never to see the great outdoors again - that seems a bit harsh.



Bantams may safely graze......how to avoid a cat-astrophe!



Meanwhile, as pastor of a flock I have a duty of protection towards them. It's not as though my bantams are pets precisely; they have essential functions like laying eggs and eating all the things that creep under the earth and providing my garden with enrichment (if you get my drift).

And I cannot keep them penned up either. My bantams are all either pure blood Old English Game or second generation thereof and that means they are, basically, as wild as the Jungle Fowl that they are descended from. They would pine and fall sick if confined, even in a roomy pen.

Now, in the context of global warming, economic meltdown, war, famine etc., this problem is pretty paltry (oops! sorry) but I find it refreshing to have such parochial issues to worry about from time to time; it takes my mind off the four horsemen of the Apocalypse (and Bishops) and boots me back into being some sort of sane(er) person.

So, after some internet research I have come up with the answer which I am happy to share with Mulier Fortis and other cat lovers...I shall commence a novena to St Gertrude...who she?

Patron Saint of cats of course......but hold on...shouldn't I be looking for a patron saint of chickens?

Well, after another web search I find that I should be praying to St Brigid of Ireland, patron saint of poultry keepers.......I shall do both!