Section One Homologous Artificial Insemination and In Vitro Fertilization

SECTION ONE Homologous Artificial Insemination and In Vitro Fertilization The Instruction rejects homologous artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization on grounds that they involve a separation between "the goods and meanings of marriage," that is, the unitive and the procreative. The separation of these two dimensions means that procreation thus achieved is "deprived of its proper perfection" and is therefore "not in conformity with the dignity of the person." The child must be conceived through an act of love and, indeed, of sexual intercourse. It is this conclusion of the Instruction that the Committee finds problematic. In its own statement, the Committee had unanimously found that artificial insemination by the husband and in vitro fertilization are "ethically acceptable" in principle. The Committee therefore offers the following reflection on the analysis and conclusion of the Instruction. First, the Committee agrees with the Instruction that "the one conceived must be the fruit of his parents' love," but it cannot understand how the conclusion is drawn that this love must, in all circumstances, mean sexual intercourse. Second, the Committee wonders how separating the unitive and procreative in an individual act, "whether to prevent or achieve pregnancy," involves separation of the goods of marriage. What happens to the goods and meaning of marriage would seem to involve the relationship, not necessarily the individual act. Further, the Committee

IS

Supplement 1

finds no radical separation of the unitive and procreative in these procedures, because it sees such interventions not as a replacement of sexual intimacy, but as its logical and technical extension-a view strongly supported by those who have experienced such interventions. Third, the Committee would question whether an action "deprived of its proper perfection" is necessarily morally wrong. Many human actions, occurring as they do amid situations of deprivation, imperfection, and conflict, are not ideal and in that sense are "deprived of their proper perfection." Such actions, however, are not always morally wrong. The Committee believes that the Instruction, in its laudable effort to avoid mechanizing marriage and procreation, has too easily accepted natural procedures as morally normative. Finally, the Committee notes the very broad ecumenical and scientific consensus with regard to assisted reproduction in the so-called "simple case" (between husband and wife). No major national committee or other religious body has rejected such intervention, given appropriate conditions of safety and respect for the pre-embryo. The Committee believes that such consensus reflects basic known human experience and intuition about the morally appropriate and inappropriate. The Instruction seems to take no account of this consensus, but to rely exclusively on previous ecclesiastical pronouncements.

Fertility and Sterility