On Bioethics
catholic moral standing on the special ethics of lifeArchive for In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)
IVF CLINICS OFFERING “RISKY” FERTILITY TREATMENT
A leading British immunologist has warned that many fertility clinics are offering women an unnecessary, potentially dangerous and possibly counterproductive treatment. Ashley Moffett, of the University of Cambridge, says that many clinics administer steroids or intravenous immunoglobulin to lower the level of uterine natural killer cells — despite the fact that there is scant evidence that this will increase fertility.”This has somehow slipped through the net of any regulation,” Dr Moffett told Nature Medicine. “It is bizarre that women who may be in early pregnancy are exposed to this sort of risk.” Immunoglobulin has a number of potential side effects, including kidney failure and hepatitis. The UK’s fertility regulator only deals with the creation and handling of embryos, not drug regimes for fertility patients.
“The get-out clause is that [doctors] discuss it with their patient,” says Raj Rai, of Imperial College London. “But this is disingenuous, because how is a patient supposed to decide?” ~ Nature Medicine, June 07
IVF BEGINS IN UGANDA
Glowing newspaper profiles of IVF doctors who bring bundles of joy to desperate couples are common enough in the US, the UK and Australia. But it is seldom that they emphasise how often the doctor consults the Bible for guidance. Recently, the Kampala Monitor profiled Dr Edward Tamale Ssali, who practices in Bukoto, in southern Uganda. He is responsible for the first birth of a frozen embryo baby and the first birth to a surrogate mother in East and Central Africa. A devout Christian, he rises every day at 5am and reads his Bible. He also hosts a TV program, Faith and Science, on Sundays. “I would be earning a lot overseas but I decided to station here,” he told the Monitor. “There is more to life than money. The Bible says that the life of a man doesn’t consist in the things that he owns.” ~ Monitor, Jun 3
IVF EXPERT PUTS BOOT INTO IVF INDUSTRY
Nor did he spare the UK’s fertility watchdog, the Human Fertility and Embryology Authority: “The regulatory authority has done a consistently bad job. It’s not prevented the exploitation of women, it’s not put out very good information to couples, it’s not limited the number of unscientific treatments people have access to, it doesn’t prevent sex selection and all sorts of other things people don’t like because there are all sorts of ways around the law.” ~ Guardian, May 31
PARENTS OF DOWN SYNDROME CHILDREN WORRY ABOUT THEIR FUTURE IN PERFECT WORLD
There are many couples who do not want to have a baby with Down syndrome,” said Deborah A. Driscoll, of the University of Pennsylvania, an author of the recommendations. “They don’t have the resources, don’t have the emotional stamina, don’t have the family support. We are recommending this testing be offered so that parents have a choice.”
But as the Times points out, doctors often paint too gloomy a picture. “She may be able to count change for the bus,” one doctor told a pregnant Delaware woman. “But what’s going to happen when the bus doesn’t come?” Her Down syndrome daughter, now 5, does not yet take the bus, but she does ride horses. ~ New York Times, May 9
… AND PRO-CHOICE ADVOCATES WORRY, TOO
Genetic testing is shaking the mindset even of abortion advocates, says the New York Times. Although 70% of Americans would support women who terminate a pregnancy if a child has a serious genetic defect, all but the staunchest supporters of pro-choice policies question whether any defect whatsoever is reason enough. The problem is that the pro-choice stand is colliding with a commitment to tolerance of human difference. And now that tests make it possible to select for late-onset diseases like breast cancer or arthritis, and may some day make it possible to select for intelligence or eye colour — not to mention sex — pro-choice disability advocates are finding hard to draw the line.”It so buys into this consumer perspective on our children,” says Marsha Saxton, of the World Institute on Disability, in Oakland, an abortion-rights supporter.
Some religious conservatives say that they trust God to give them the child that is meant to be,” wrote Ann Althouse, a law lecturer at the University of Wisconsin, on her legal blog. “But isn’t there something equivalent for social liberals? Shouldn’t they have moral standards about what reasons are acceptable for an abortion?” ~ New York Times, May 13
On Bioethics 