Is this an appropriate reason to become pregnant?
Advance in technology can often raise issues regarding their application in everyday life. There are various moral considerations that arise in association with the ability to choose specific features of children when they are born. The advent of in vitro fertilization (IVF) has given parents the opportunity to decide specific characteristics of their children at an early stage. The underlying issue of the case is whether or not they should have a child that is matched with their sick child's tissue type so that they can obtain a transplant. While this would be of great medical benefit it presents a major moral question regarding whether or not it is right to get pregnant in order to save the life of their child. Despite the potential for them to help their living child, the fact that consideration is not being given to the well-being of the unborn child dictates that they are making the decision for the wrong reason. I believe that in looking at the various challenges that have been given to the process it is evident that they should not go forth with the pregnancy due to the moral dangers that are involved. This is, in my opinion, not an appropriate reason to become pregnant.
Is the attempt to select a compatible embryo ethically appropriate?
In attempting to select a compatible embryo, the arguments against IVF demonstrate that it is not morally appropriate. This is due to a variety of ethical challenges that face the decision. First of all, the discarding of unwanted tissues demonstrates a profound moral concern. The selection of specific genetic factors in the birth of a child seems to be fundamentally against the basic laws of nature. The increasing technological capabilities of humanity should be questioned in regards to the potential for dramatic changes. Furthermore, in looking at the potential issues that might be involved with the operation and the negative consequences that could result it is evident that the decision should not be made lightly. The advancement of such technologies has been viewed by many to be a threat to the dignity of the human individual. The potential risks to both the mother and the child demonstrate that there could be complications that result from going forward with the operation.
One of the major ethical challenges to this approach is the discard problem. The need to discard embryos that are considered unworthy of fertilization due to specific problems, in this case not being a match to the desired tissue type, demonstrates an ethical concern. Despite the fact that this problem has been largely overcome by the process of IVF it is evident that in this particular case there is a need to examine and discard those embryos that do not beet the criteria that they are looking for. This treatment dictates that there should be greater debate regarding the importance of the human embryo. This selective process goes against the natural processes of selective evolution which dictate that only those that are fit to survive in a given circumstance should be able to do so. While medications and other technological capabilities have given humanity the edge in adaptation and survival the level of aggression that the selection of specific genetic traits dictates is beyond the bounds of moral acceptance.
This coupled with the variable rate of success seems to dictate that the moral cost is not worth the reward. There are various possibilities for negative outcomes of the method, including damaging the woman's ovarian tissues as well as an overall rejection of the implantation itself. This coupled with the possibility for limited success regarding the successful adaption of the egg through surgery presents a moral dilemma that should be considered by the parties involved. The text indicates that failures in in vitro fertilization can result in not only physical harm but mental and emotional harm as well. The attempt to transplant a fetus and obtain a live birth not only has low odds of success but can also be very expensive. This can create further stress in the marriage itself which, in this case, could cause greater harm. The sickness of the 17 year old coupled with the lost hope of a failed operation could be profoundly detrimental to the overall mental health of those involved.
I personally believe that consideration should also be given for the child itself. While the parents have decided to go through with the pregnancy in order to save their older child it seems that they have not given consideration for the newborn or its health. The text indicates that those that are born through IVF methods have an increased chance to have heart defects. In this sense, the moral or legal identity of the embryo creates an issue. In my opinion, this concern arises from the lack of consideration that is being given to the child's well-being by the parents. While the child might be useful in helping to cure their older child they might possibly be presented with a new set of challenges, as their newborn could have poor health as well. It seems to me that the increased risk to the child for sickness and poor health presents a challenge to the idea that the parents should go through with the process. The level of risk that is associated with the operation, in my view, seems to demonstrate that the moral cost of going through with it could potentially outweigh the benefits.
Despite the fact that there have been major advances in the process of IVF it is also apparent that there are underlying risks associated as well. According to the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence actions should be taken that ensure that good care is provided and that harm and injury should be avoided. The parents wish to help their sick child get better but, in the process, they are potentially bringing another unhealthy individual into the world in order to help the other. Moral issues that are associated with this case demonstrate that the discarding of embryos in order to select one with specific traits is inherently unnatural. Furthermore, risks associated with the health of the mother as well as the health of the newborn demonstrate that the operation might not be worth the moral cost. Furthermore, the financial cost of the operation could put a large amount of stress on the mother, complicating her pregnancy as well as her and her husband's relationship.
References
“New Methods of Reproduction.” Problems in Healthcare Ethics. Ch. 9.231-364.
