One’s perspective certainly colors one’s perception of reality. In mid-December the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a document entitled Dignitas Personae (The Dignity of a Person). It deals with the ethical issues arising from biomedical research and provides guidance on how to respect human life and human procreation in our present scientific age.
The reception of the document was varied. The United States Conference of Catholic bishops refer to the instruction as one that was “welcomed for guidance on issues of procreation and medical research.” Eugene’s Register Guard headlined it differently, “Vatican Blasts Infertility Science.” The subtitle was a little less severe. It stated that the new document “issues warnings about the moral dangers of many widely-used medical procedures.” Warnings can be very helpful. “Blasts” usually are not.
Some will regard this document as a rather lengthy series of “no’s” to various contemporary fertility treatments, embryo manipulation and genetic enhancement. But this perception misses the heart of its teaching. In fact, Dignitas Personae chooses to emphasize the “great ‘yes’ to human life.” It is this fundamental “yes” to human life and the integrity of marriage which resonates throughout the entire instruction.
All science and medicine that is ethically pursued is strongly affirmed by the document. This is true of fertility treatments that “overcome or correct pathologies and succeed in re-establishing the normal functioning of human procreation.” The same is true about the therapeutic use of stem cells so long as the inherent dignity of the human person is maintained and protected. It also affirms the intrinsic worth, value and equality of every human being from conception to natural death. But when the basic right to life is attacked or threatened or when normal procreation within the bounds of a loving marriage is directly assaulted, then the document appropriately warns about such abuses.
The theological foundation of the document is grounded in some of the basic teachings of Pope John Paul II. According to the late Pontiff, both right reason and faith assert that the human being, coming from the first moment of conception, is a union of body and soul and has an eternal vocation. This union endures throughout the entire lifespan and, as a result, no one may assert a lesser or greater value to the reality of any human being. From the moment of conception every human is entitled to respect. Furthermore, marriage and family are the authentic context for the origin and growth of such an eternal vocation.
Back in 1987 the same Roman Congregation issued an instruction entitled Donum Vitae (Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation). That instruction addressed questions about reproductive technologies and embryo experimentation. It also discussed more fully the threat of human cloning. The new document provides instruction about some issues which now require more explicit guidelines.
With respect to anti-implementation drugs and devices (e.g., IUD, “morning after” pill), whereas the knowledge of the mode of action of some drugs may be incomplete, nonetheless, there is valid evidence of an anti-implementation (early abortifacient) effect. Those who will request or prescribe such drugs or devices in order to prevent the survival of any embryo that may possibly have been conceived are guilty of the sin of abortion.
Efforts to correct a specific genetic defect in the cells of an individual patient, commonly described as “somatic cell” gene therapy, raise again basic issues of risk and benefit. A particular caution is raised about “germ line” gene therapy, which would affect all of a person’s cells, including reproductive cells, and therefore affect future generations. In its current state such human germ line gene therapy is not acceptable. Why? Because of its massive and unpredictable risks and its need to manipulate human embryos in the laboratory.
We all read about genetic enhancement/designer babies. In this matter there are obvious medical risks involved. The basic concern is an attitude of dissatisfaction with finite human nature as created by God. This so-called “eugenic mentality” would spur new divisions between groups of human beings, placing man over God in the role of creation whereby we make decisions about what is a “better” human being.
The document is positive about many new advances in producing and using stem cells without harm to human life. But it cautions against proposals for altering the human cloning procedure so it will make embryonic stem cells without first producing an embryo. Only if such techniques were not to risk creating and then destroying a human person would they be attempted in humans. Fortunately, the discovery of new techniques for directly reprogramming our adult cells into cells with the properties of embryonic stem cells has diminished interest in such procedures.
The instruction also rejects attempts to create human/animal hybrid embryos. Not only are there unacceptable health risks involved, but the mixing of animal and human elements could be “capable of disrupting the specific identity of man.”
A rather sensitive issue revolves around the use of unethically obtained cells and tissues. The so-called “criterion of independence” where there is a clear separation between the researcher and those who obtain the material unethically is not sufficient to exempt researchers from moral complicity. Every one has a duty to distance himself and his work from unjust situations created by others and to affirm the value of human life. The use of such material may be justified by proportionately grave reasons (e.g., danger to children’s health may warrant use of a vaccine based on fetal tissue from abortion). There remains serious responsibility to form consciences correctly so that medicine and science won’t be depending on such sources in the future.
One final matter which remains unclear deals with embryo adoption. Many couples today want to rescue frozen embryos which have been abandoned by their own parents. There are many problems remaining which lead the Church to reject the use of donor embryos in an attempt to resolve a couple’s infertility. This is an unresolved dilemma, however, because many human embryos are now in frozen storage and there seems to be no morally sound solution about what to do. All of this underscores how wrong it is to produce and freeze them in the first place.
These issues are complex and challenging, to say the least. The advances in scientific and medical procedures are always to be applauded where there is respect for the sanctity of human life from the very moment of conception. But when innocent human lives are discarded or manipulated, whether now or later, a grave violation of the dignity of a person occurs which can never be ethically sanctioned. Seekers of the truth will be further enlightened by this instruction from the Vatican. Reverence for human life remains the centerpiece of various cultural and religious traditions. Such reverence is at the heart of Dignitas Personae.
