Artificial Reproductive Technologies Policy Challenges
Americans are innovative. From the Industrial Revolution to the age of STEM we have pushed ourselves to the edge of scientific and technological reasoning and farther. Each generation has faced new frontiers, but today we stand on the precipice of the ethical debate over the creation of human life. Centered squarely within this important debate is Artificial Reproductive Technologies and how human embryos resulting from these procedures should be handled. Human life has always elicited mankind’s attention as it is fundamental to society and the world as we know it. While topics like abortion and physician assisted suicide have become major political and policy issues in recent decades, there has also been a slow, but steady, growth in the area of assisted conception through procedures like in vitro fertilization (IVF) and frozen embryo transfer (FET).
Initially applied to animal breeding, these assisted reproductive technologies expanded in 1978 with the birth of the first human baby through IVF treatment.[1] Today, there exists a plethora of additional features in embryo selection, including the ability for technicians to test for genetic abnormalities as well as biological sex. Initially, these steps could be defined as “progress,” but that is where the danger lies. The Family Foundation believes that all human life begins at fertilization which makes embryos formed in countless labs across the United States inherently priceless. They are not just the result of scientific exploration but rather carriers of human life. As such, we should be very cautious in how we treat the policies surrounding them.
The belief that these tiny embryos are “less than human” has resulted in tragedies in the current day including the discarding of undesirable embryos and embryonic stem cell research. Recent Virginia case law is not favorable towards these embryos either as they were designated in Heidemann v. Heidemann (2023) as “chattels or goods” that could be bought and sold like any other product. This ruling relied on old slavery provisions to justify treating human embryonic life as “property.”[2] Understandably, this distinction is quite disheartening as it further opens up the possibility of human embryos becoming a commodity that are then bought and sold by research companies, and used by private labs who have no qualms with destroying them in the name of experimentation. This is already occurring in embryonic stem cell research, where in order to harvest the stem cells of an embryo, it must first be destroyed. This disregard for the human right to life in the name of conducting research is nothing short of cruel and inhumane. Unlike in natural conception, where the embryo implants and develops, assisted reproduction technologies like IVF and FET include the element of selection. After selection, parents must decide whether to store or discard the remaining embryos. In cases of divorce, this could also lead to lengthy legal disputes, as in the case of Heidemann v. Heidemann.
While these developments in human reproduction are certainly concerning, there is hope. In the wake of the Dobbs decision, there have been many more conversations surrounding the definition of personhood and several states that have enacted heartbeat bills, which ban abortion after six to eight weeks. Americans do still value life and are not willing to let it be callously destroyed. Some potential policy solutions could involve stricter regulations surrounding the largely unregulated industry of embryonic stem cell research, as well as prohibitions on emerging technologies like cloning and the use of AI in medicine. In recent weeks, AI has begun to be used to determine the viability of embryos and thus to determine which should be used and which should be destroyed. This places a machine over the creation or extinction of human life. New technological territories such as these these must be very carefully scrutinized by policymakers. Psalm 139:14 reminds us that before we are even born, we are “fearfully and wonderfully made.” Any person, even a microscopic, frozen person has inherent worth in the eyes of the Lord and should be treated with the dignity that he or she deserves.
[1] Ashley M Eskew and Emily S Jungheim, “A History of Developments to Improve in Vitro Fertilization,” Missouri medicine, 2017, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140213/.
[2] https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/sites/circuit/files/assets/documents/pdf/opinions/cl-2021-15372-honeyhline-heidemann-v-jason-heidemann.pdf
Written by Catherine Hicham (2023 Intern)