Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The paper is written in reply to Christopher Oleson's “Dignitas personae and the Question of Heterologous Embryo Transfer” in this issue. Oleson provides a very perceptive and comprehensive commentary on the key texts. This reply articulates my reasons for continued skepticism on whether Dignitas personae has settled the question on embryo rescue. The source of my skepticism concerns Oleson's key premise according to which heterologous embryo transfer for treating infertility and for rescue are the same moral acts. I argue that they are in fact different moral acts not merely in virtue of different intentions, but in virtue of their order. Embryo transfer is properly ordered to the end of rescue, but is inapposite for treating infertility—as this would replace the conjugal act. I conclude by offering several reductio ad absurdum arguments that argue in favor of embryo rescue.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Haas

John M.

“Begotten Not Made: A Catholic View of Reproductive Technology,” http://www.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/98rlphaa.shtml.

See Oleson

Christopher

“Dignitas personae and the Question of Heterologous Embryo Transfer,” 134, in this issue, for commitment to this premise.

I say “if given the opportunity” because the obligation to save human lives is not absolute, but only “kicks in” if given the opportunity. Included in my use of the term “opportunity” is not only an occasion to save, but also safety to the rescuer, and no other obligations to other humans are compromised by choosing to rescue.

See, “Dignitas Personae: Questions and Answers,” http://www.usccb.org/comm/Dignitaspersonae/Q_and_A.pdf.

See Catholic News Service, “Dignitas Personae: Analyzing Major Elements,” December 19, 2008, http://www.the-tidings.com/2008/121908/biocenter.htm.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum vitae, II.A.1, emphasis added.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum vitae, II.A.2.

Oleson “Dignitas personae,” 136.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum vitae, II.A.2, emphasis added. I draw out the importance of that emphasis later in the text.

10.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum vitae, II.A.2, emphasis added. I draw out the importance of that emphasis later in the text.

11.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum vitae, II.A.2, emphasis added. I draw out the importance of that emphasis later in the text.

12.

Oleson “Dignitas personae,” 138, original emphasis.

13.

Oleson “Dignitas personae,”, 138, original emphasis.

14.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum vitae, II.B.7, emphasis added.

15.

I say “currently” because in the future medical technology may advance and provide artificial incubators.

Moral Justification and Human Acts: A Reply to Christopher Oleson *

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References