In vitro Fertilization Christian and Islamic Perspectives on the Ethical Dilemma of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) Stephanie Sariles Department of Biology; College of Arts and Sciences Abilene Christian University After defining IVF procedures and the associated biomedical ethics with each, I will compare and contrast Christian and Islamic perspectives on IVF. Christianity in general does not accept IVF, because it is an unnatural method of reproduction that can affect Christian traditions such as parenthood and marriage. Despite this view, Protestants, in particular, have opened up to IVF as a method for treating infertility. Islam fully accepts IVF provided the married couple follows Islamic law. Sunni Muslims do not accept gamete donation, but Shi’ite Muslims are more flexible with gamete donation and surrogacy. The development of reproductive Christianity share several similarities in technology has become an answered prayer beliefs and doctrines, however, these for several infertile couples around the religions do not share the same perspectives world. Reproductive technologies, such as in regards to the ethical dilemma of in-vitro artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization. Islam focuses on the interaction fertilization, have become common options between marriage laws and IVF, while offered by physicians for patients, who Christianity concentrates on the interaction desire to hold their own child in their arms between IVF and a natural order of life even though medically the probability for designated by a sole creator. This them to naturally conceive are low. comparative analysis between two religious Although this scientific development has views of IVF demonstrates that religion is a become a solution for infertility and often factor that contributes to the ethical dilemma viewed as a miracle for some, it has been a of reproductive technologies and influences controversial decision that has caused rifts the societal perspective on IVF. between a person and their faith. The ideas of a sole creator, the natural order of life, Standard IVF and marriage laws have come into question Sir Robert Edwards introduced in- due to the development of the scientific vitro fertilization in 1978. The procedure for intervention in reproduction. Religions IVF has changed since 1978 and has become across the nations have argued their stance more complicated by implementing gene on reproductive technologies. In-vitro therapy and gamete donation, however, fertilization (IVF), for example, has become standard IVF or “simple case” IVF will be an ethical dilemma discussed throughout the the main focus of this paper. Standard IVF world by several doctrines of faith, in which involves a married couple in which the each has developed their own perspective, sperm comes from the husband and the according to their foundation and beliefs. ovum is from the wife. Once the pre-embryo Religions who share similarities in their is formed, it is implanted into the wife’s doctrines have accepted and denied different aspects of in-vitro fertilization, such as Islam and Christianity. Islam and Dialogue & Nexus | Fall 2016-Spring 2017 |Volume 4 1 In vitro Fertilization uterus.1 Before the pre-embryo is formed, across the world, who suffered from the infertile woman undergoes hormone infertility. His ethical stance on reproductive treatment, which allows the woman to technologies was adopted through the produce more than one egg on her next clinical imperative and the inalienable rights cycle. Her cycle is then monitored carefully of couples to have their own child, as long to detect the moment in which the eggs are as they did no harm.4 “Do no harm” is ready to be removed.2 These eggs are then derived from the Hippocratic Oath, which is placed onto a petri dish to be fertilized by recited by physicians once they have the husband’s sperm. Anywhere from 48 to completed all their boards and examinations. 72 hours after fertilization and the embryos The oath states, I will use regimens for the have cleaved once or twice, they are benefit of the ill in accordance with my transferred to the wife’s uterus. If the ability and my judgment, but from what is to transfer is viable, the embryo develops their harm or injustice, I will keep them.5 In naturally with minimal medical intervention. order to understand this statement, it has to Sir Robert Edwards used a similar basic be viewed in two parts. Injustice speaks to technique to “create” the first IVF baby, the physician’s duty to ensure that the Louise Brown. patient will not be harmed by moral transgressions, while harm speaks to the IVF and Medical Ethics physician’s duty to heal the sick.6 Physicians Edwards knew ethical dilemmas have adopted Edward’s ethical stance, in would arise from the introduction of IVF as which, if the infertile patient consent to the a method for reproduction; however, he treatment and no harm is done then IVF can didn’t shy away from the ethical issues. be used as a method to heal infertility. Medicine, in Edward’s opinion, differed Edwards developed IVF in order to cure from science because they had different infertility among the world’s population, objectives. Medicine is driven by the daily which was considered fully legitimate by the need to treat patients, the ability to assess ethical committee in the UK known as the different techniques, and the opportunity to House of Lords. However, Edwards prescribe expensive medicines.3 Edward’s understood that when in-vitro fertilization interest in discovering the solution to would be presented as a cure for infertility, infertility began with developing it would be viewed as unacceptable to relationships with physicians at the National several people.7 Institute of Medical Research in London, who spoke of the numerous infertile patients Descriptions of Religions involved in IVF that would benefit from his reproductive Ethical Dilemma research that he had been conducting on Religion has played a key role in the animal embryos. As Edwards and his ethical dilemmas surrounding the research team continued to work on advancement of reproductive technologies, reproductive technologies through animal particularly Christianity and Islam. embryos, they believed IVF was a Christianity contains several doctrines that significant clinical imperative to develop, could be expanded on, however, for the which would allow them to help millions purpose of this paper, Christians believe 1 McCormick, R.A., 1997 5 Miles, S.H, 2004 (59) 2 Singer, P., 1985 6 Miles, S.H., 2004 3 Edwards R.G., 2007 7 Edwards, R.G., 2007 4 Edwards, R.G., 2007 Dialogue & Nexus | Fall 2016-Spring 2017 |Volume 4 2 In vitro Fertilization Jesus Christ was sent by God to save all of perspectives in regards to the ethical humanity from eternal death. They also dilemma of IVF. believe that Christ is the center of the Bible and part of the Holy Trinity. This would Christian Perspective on IVF include God the father, Christ the son, and Christians, both Protestants and the Holy Ghost. Christianity can be divided Roman Catholics, generally are opposed to into two main groups Roman Catholicism IVF and often reject reproductive and Protestantism. Roman Catholicism technologies as a method for conception. accepts seven sacraments, which are Roman Catholics are opposed to any confirmation, penance, extreme unction, medical intervention that disrupts the natural baptism, Holy Communion, holy orders, and process of reproduction from birth control to marriage. Protestants derived from the IVF. Protestants are hesitant to accept IVF, opposition to the Roman Catholic rule in the but are more open to the idea of IVF as a early 16th century. Protestants can be divided treatment for infertility. into several denominations, but as a whole In 1869, Pope Pius defined an they have several core beliefs including only animated and unanimated fetus to be the two of the seven sacraments. These are same and not have any distinctions. The baptism and the Lord’s Supper.8 Pope removed the distinction in order to Christianity, particularly Protestantism, is mandate the punishment for abortion at any often compared to Islam. This comparison is stage, which led to the opposition to birth often made due to the text-centered religion, control. This set the precedent for the the parallels between how the texts are Roman Catholic perspective on reproductive interpreted, and the problems that arise technologies. This mandate from the Pope through an absence of centralized authority supported the Church’s stance that the soul figures and structures.9 Islam’s central belief and life begin at conception.11 The Roman is that Muhammad was a messenger of God, Catholic Church has opposed artificial birth but Muslims do not worship him.10 They control because it is an unnatural medical follow the teachings found in the holy intervention of conception that defies Qur’an, which was revealed to Muhammad, Christian tradition.12 The tradition being who was deemed as the final prophet of violated by birth control is the reproductive Allah. Islam has foundational principles dependence on sexual intercourse. Another called the five basic pillars that address reason birth control is opposed by the prayer, alms tax, fasting, the pilgrimage to Catholic Church is due the severance of the Mecca, and one God who appointed link between intercourse and procreation. Muhammad as the final prophet. Islam is Any procedure or object that breaks the link divided into two sects Sunni Muslim and between intercourse and procreation is Shi’ite Muslim. Sunni Muslims believe that deemed unnatural. This idea of unnatural Abu Bakr is the rightful caliph, while Shi’ite conception was carried over to reproductive Muslims believe that Mohammed Ali is the technologies. Conception outside of its rightful caliph. Christianity and Islam are natural context is wrong due to the belief distinct religions that are often compared that sex without the possibility of conception due to their similar doctrines and faith is unnatural and defies the order of life.