U.K.'s Solution to Multiple Problems: One at a Time | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > April (Web-only)

Christianity Today, April (Web-only), 2007 |

U.K.'s Solution to Multiple Problems: One at a Time

Britain may tighten IVF laws to prevent multiple pregnancies.

Tabby Yang | posted 4/12/2007 09:25AM

2 of 2

"The U.S. is more the wild, wild West when it comes to reproductive technologies," said Mohler. "That's why we have reproductive tourism going on with people coming from Europe to the United States, because if they have enough money, they're likely to find just about whatever they're looking for." Europeans come to the States because they know that doctors here are permitted to implant two or three embryos regardless of the age of the eggs.

Many Christians have been quick to embrace in vitro fertilization as a legitimate way for infertile couples to have children, without questioning the ethics of it. "I think evangelicals … haven't thought about these things very much at all," Cameron said, adding, "if you don't think about something, you tend to end up doing it."

Cameron also said it would be more ethical for the U.K. and the U.S. to adopt laws similar to those in Germany, where couples are allowed to fertilize a maximum of three eggs at a time. German law does not permit the freezing of embryos, thus avoiding the dilemma clinics face when deciding what to do with the extra frozen embryos. "It is possible to use IVF in Germany, but not in a way which ultimately destroys embryos and uses embryos as things," he concluded.

Buoma does not believe that laws limiting the number of embryo transfers address the deeper issues of fertilization treatments. "The Christian community would be well served," he said, "if we could assist infertile couples in recognizing that the inability to conceive or bear a child need not be perceived as a curse or a failure to 'be fruitful and multiply.'"

Related Elsewhere:

Related news articles include:

IVF clinics may face multi-birth restrictions | Fertility clinics may be forced to restrict the number of women implanting more than one embryo at a time during IVF, under proposals unveiled today. (The Telegraph)

Childless couples to face new IVF hurdle | IVF clinics that produce twins and triplets in more than one in ten pregnancies will face disciplinary action under plans to cut multiple births announced yesterday. (The Times)

IVF: Is having twins really so bad? | The birth of twins is a scenario that has become increasingly common in the past few decades as the number of multiple births in the UK has risen significantly, mainly thanks to the success of IVF procedures. (The Sunday Herald)

An essay comparing German and U.S. policies on assisted reproduction is available online.

Christianity Today's articles on contraception and reproductive technology include:

The Slope Really Is Slippery | Why we struggle to gain our moral footing in bioethics. (March 1, 2007)
Fluid Solution | Research advance could shift stem-cell debate. (February 12, 2007)

War on the Weak | Eugenics has made a lethal comeback. (December 4, 2006)
Better Late Than Never | Pregnancy care centers move to the inner city. (November 22, 2006)

Worth Protecting | It's hard to see the humanity of tiny embryos if we live by blind faith. (November 9, 2006)

first page |

2 of 2

share this page

April (Web-only) 2007, Vol. 51

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment

Reader Reviews are below

Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.

Click here for international orders

2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Displaying 1 - 3 of 4 comments.

See all comments

Annie Witz

Posted: April 13, 2007 9:06 PM

The problem with IVF is that it makes embyos that will die most of the time. Look at the stats of how many rounds of IVF fail. You are making embyros that will die. This is why so many in the prolife world are against this. While I say this with a heavy heart for those who can't have a baby the ends don't justify the means. Those who think this is OK should ask themselves when did Christ become both God and man? It was at conception and not sometime after that. As to the comments from Mr Tenhula protecting life from conception is not pandering to the right. It is a fundamental right that all Christians should be fighting for. Couldn't I say to him that those in the western world have the luxury of even considering IVF while those in the third world would probably be shocked by the very thought of it. Christians not only do more humanitarian aid than any other religion and most know that we should do more!

arussell

Posted: April 13, 2007 7:18 AM

What they don't mention in this article is the tremendous costs involved with IVF, emotional and financial. We, like Adrienne, fully understand the moral implications of going through the process. However, following a plan like Germany means that I would probably have only one child. It is tremendously expensive and not covered by insurance in most states. Additionally it is a huge emotional strain to go through the process. I can't imagine having to do that over and over. We implanted two embryos, and I am pregnant with one. We will use all of our frozen embyros or adopt them to another Christian family. I don't think it is a place that lawmakers should be involved. That is best left to parents and their doctors, and that is why as a Christian you choose your doctor wisely.

Adrienne

Posted: April 12, 2007 1:32 PM

My husband and I have had two children by IVF. We are staunchly pro-life and would never have considered it as an option if the hospital we used did not have rigorous standards. They never implant more than two at a time. They also provide opportunities for donation of embryos for adoption and will not destroy embryos unless the patients insist on it (which, of course, we don't). They also offer cryo-storage for future attempts. We are both concerned with people who fertilize eggs willy-nilly, feeling free to destroy those they aren't interested in. There are, understandably, people who have not considered the ethical implications of IVF, but rest assured, there are ways to approach infertility using IVF that do not violate moral principles. If done cautiously, thoughtfully and prayerfully, it can be a viable option, I think, even for believers.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.