Previously we examined moral objections to in vitro fertilization (IVF) on the basis of proper respect for human life. But if those objections no longer applied, would the Church change its moral analysis of IVF? The answer is no.

Apart from the life issues, IVF is still extremely problematic as it regards marriage itself.

How does IVF not show respect for marriage? At least where a married couple utilizes it to start a family? After all, the Church teaches that marriage is ordered toward family life. And it teaches that openness to new life is essential for the validity of marriage. Isn’t IVF simply providing a couple a way to fulfill their desire for a family, and live more fully what the Church teaches about marriage?

Let’s begin with Church teaching regarding marriage. God’s design (and therefore the Church’s teaching) for the marriage covenant involves the permanent and exclusive giving of self between a man and a woman, done with an openness to new life which may come from their union.

First, IVF violates this covenant by involving third parties. Husband and wife do not conceive a child through the mutual gift of self, but rather through the intervention of other people who actually bring about that new life and any subsequent pregnancy.

A simple question to ask which reveals one of the Church’s main objections is this: “who is making her pregnant?” It is not her husband, nor her husband’s action, even if his sperm is being utilized. She is pregnant through the direct action of someone else, and the new life within her was brought about not by her husband, but the technical expertise of someone outside her marriage covenant.

This same objection might be more obvious if a woman “hired” a man other than her husband to impregnate her if her spouse were unable to do so. In either case there is a direct violation of the marriage covenant.

In IVF husband and wife are not giving themselves to each other so that new life may come about, but are in some way giving a portion of themselves (at least the egg and sperm) to a third person, usually a stranger who then actually brings about the conception of the children and the pregnancy itself.

In every case you have others who can claim to be a “parent” to the child (even if not biologically), insofar as it was their action or actions which were directly responsible for bringing the child into existence. Their actions are strictly utilitarian in nature, but nevertheless essential. If one assumes that in typical cases you have several others involved from start to finish, that same violation of marriage exclusivity is compounded.

In actual practice, this violation of marriage can be complicated even further. Often, couples seeking IVF may choose to use donor eggs or sperm instead of their own. The underlying infertility problems they seek relief from may be directly tied to a defect in either sperm or eggs. For some, using donated eggs and sperm may be the only option for a child through IVF. Besides, the success rates are typically much higher when donated eggs are used.

We immediately see the problem. We have not only introduced third parties into the process, but now that child being created is biologically someone else’s. Different scenarios expose greater moral problems. A single woman who wants a child of her own. Gay or lesbian couples. None of which are in keeping with God’s design for marriage, all of which are realities made possible through IVF. Not to mention selecting donors with the “right” genetic makeup and “purchasing” their eggs or sperm for your child. And on and on.

Far from being a way in which infertile couples can more fully live out their marriage vocation, seen this way IVF becomes a means through which God’s design for marriage loses out to our own.

Look for more on this topic next month.