IVF and Catholicity

[RaisinGirls]

I am really struggling at the moment and would appreciate any support you can offer. I have one DD but have also had 3 MC.

After much soul searching I have decided to go for IVF as due to my age I really feel like it's the last roll of the dice, and I would dearly like my DD to have s sibling.

I have now started IVF but can't shake the feeling that what I am doing is wrong as I am a Catholic. I feel deeply guilty by what I am doing and feel like I can't go to Mass anymore. Has anyone a perspective that can help me?

pearlylum - because adopted children aren't the product of a natural marriage act....At least, not of the adoptive parents, and, in many cases, not of the biological parents either.

Re: the possible extra costs of doing IVF etc in a way that avoids excess embryos that would be wasted, surely that's a matter for the individuals concerned to worry about?

If God hadn't meant us to have them then he wouldn't have sent us the means to have them and I wouldn't have conceived them.

That doesn't work well as reasoning. God also gives us the means to kill each other and we're not supposed to.

I'm not surprised it didn't occur to you. Most people don't realise what happens in IVF and don't link it to abortion, for example.
The Catholic Church really doesn't address it often. Many years ago, in a group discussion I presented IVF and nobody saw any problem with it or had heard about it.
I imagine many priests may not be aware.

OP, I'm so sorry for your situation, the whole thing, not just the moral dilemma. I have an IVF child and have also had 2 MCs. I really empathise!

pearlylum Faith is something quite apart from your religion - even Popes struggle with their faith. Priests often talk about their "long dark nights of the soul". Some people (gasp!) struggle with belief all their lives. But if you are not part of a religion, as I suspect from your posts you are not, then you may make the mistake of thinking one must be necessary for the other.

I think this thread highlights the differing stances of Catholicism and IVF.

OP, please go to mass and talk to your priest. Ask for guidance as you are struggling.

For what it's worth Op, my opinion is that you need to find a balance between what you need and what you believe. I very much feel that the church must move forward. It is no fairer for a compassionate religion to approve of a happy childless woman than berate one who has IVF

"surely that's a matter for the individuals concerned to worry about?"

So why does the church even have a stance on contraception and abortion? Indeed the church lobbies heavily and successfully to prevent women from having abortion.

Lweji for me, the difference between abortion and IVF is clear - one is about trying to create much wanted children who will be treasured and loved. The other is not.

The extra cost is certainly for the individual to worry about. I just mentioned it as to why most places are more likely to conduct procedures that produce many extra embryos, and given the high costs for normal IVF, the couple may want to consider carefully the financial implications as well.

The thing is with Ivf you don't know how things are going to work out with the number and quality of embryos until egg retrieval. I had totally different numbers on each cycle.

I suppose my point is in deciding to have Ivf you put your trust in the specialists to figure out the right protocol and how many eggs you should be aiming for, I certainly wouldn't have potentially lowered my chances to kind of keep in line with my religion.

pearlylum I don't follow your most recent post. I was saying that there IS a way to do IVF which ensures that no embryos are wasted and that sperm is collected in a non-masturbatory way. You claim this way is more expensive. My response was simply that IF that is the case (and it won't necessarily be so) why is that a problem for anyone other than the would-be parents funding the treatment?

dontcryforme
How do you view extra embryos that are burnt?
How do you view destroying 10 or more live embryos to produce one successful baby?
The cost of IVF are all those abortions, effectively.

Lweji - cross-posted and I see that you have posted further since, clarifying. Yes, IVF is expensive, however it's done, but most infertile couples will pay whatever they can afford for it.

Cotton yes, I think that's how most people view it.

dontcryforme- you are mixing me up with another poster.

Lweji I repeat, it's about the intent behind the actions. How do you view embryo donation, if it prevents embryos being destroyed? As a good thing, like adoption?

One of the "side effects " of IVF is that embryos are destroyed. Inevitably.
One of the effects of abortion is that embryos are destroyed.

I fail to see the distinction.

pearlylum - apologies. I think you were both posting about things 'that are for individuals to worry about' and that confused me, reading in a hurry.

pearlylum embryos vs fetuses is one difference.....

pearlylum what are you classing as destroying an embryo? An egg that fertilises into an embryo and fails to develop further or embryos that are frozen and then unused so left to perish?

A pp made a clear distinction in the difference between Ivf and abortion.

Fertility doctors will always harvest and fertilise more eggs than they need. Some will be stronger or better fit the criteria they are looking for.
The intent behind the procedure ( although not the primary one) is to discard and destroy some of the embryos.
Only collecting and fertilising one or two eggs would severley limit the chance of success for the whole procedure.

The church tells us that life begins at conception- one of the reasons that contraception is not advised.
The embryos that "fail to develop" are allowed to perish. You think that's not destroying an embryo?

"pearlylum embryos vs fetuses is one difference....." so you agree with abortion with time limits?

No I don't think it's destroying an embryo when it has stopped growing and died by itself.

"A pp made a clear distinction in the difference between Ivf and abortion."

I don't see any difference. Except at least in the case of abortion a woman is not deliberately creating an embryo for death.

pearlylum I am honestly not sure what advice you are giving the OP.

"No I don't think it's destroying an embryo when it has stopped growing and died by itself."

Of course it is. That's laughable.
So if you leave a new born baby in a cold sluice room for a day without nourishment that's not killing it- it died by itself.

My perspective is that the church has some stupid dogma.