IAVAAN - BIOETHICS PROJECT
BIOETHICS PROJECT
Cloning
Egg Bank
Embryo Adoption
Embryonic Stem Cell Research
In Vitro Fertilization
Womb Transplants
Op-Eds/Commentaries
Surrogate mother for gay dads pulls termination request, 5/29/03
'Sperm washing' hope for HIV patients, 4/24/03
A bill for an act 1.2 relating to assisted reproduction; authorizing 1.3 gestational surrogacy agreements; proposing coding for 1.4 new law as Minnesota Statutes, chapter 257D
Posted: 3/10/2003
Cloning
Clones and Rael-Politik: The Jack Kevorkians of the cloning debate weigh in, 1/13/03
Embryo transfers give rise to controversy, 11/10/02
Expert (Zavos) Doubts Cloning Claims of Ex-Partner (Antinori)- Paper, 5/8/02
Medical Cloning Is 'Anti-life', 4/24/02
Italy Doctor Says Three Cloned Pregnancies Exist..., 4/23/02
The Powerful Argument Against Human Cloning, 4/17/02
Research On Stem Cells Isn't Cloning, 4/17/02
There's Nothing 'Anti-life' About Medical Cloning, 4/16/02
Chinese Cloning Control Required, 4/16/02
Clone Bashing, 4/11/02
Bush's Clone Ban Plan Irrelevant, 4/11/02
Cloned Baby Cancer Warning, 4/10/02
Confusion Reigns Over Cloning Pregnancy Report, 4/08/02
Doubt and Shock Greet Cloning Pregnancy Report, 4/08/02
Cloning Pregnancy Claim Prompts Outrage, 4/05/02
Add Bunnies to Cloned List, 4/04/02
Human Cloning Project Claims Progress: Doctor Says Woman '8 weeks Pregnant', 4/03/02
Proposed Florida Ban on Human Cloning Doesn't Pass Session, 3/23/02
Liberal Coalition Seeks Cloning Halt, 3/20/02
Cloned Mice a Weighty Concern, 3/01/02
U.S. Proposes Global Ban On Cloning, 2/27/02
U.K. Legal Go-Ahead to Clone Human Embryos, 2/27/02
What Is Therapeutic Cloning, 2/27/02
UN Panel Begins Drafting Global Ban on Cloning, 2/26/02
Taiwan Bars Human Cloning in Stem Cell Research, 2/20/02
A Try to Clone Human Being Is Set to Start By Panayiotis Zavos, 2/12/02
Cloned Mice Die Earlier, Study Shows, 2/11/02
Senate Jumps Into Human Cloning Debate; Landrieu Backs Total Ban, 2/05/02
Ban All Cloning Techniques, 1/23/02
Bush´s Bioethics Panel Focuses on Human Cloning, 1/17/02
Cloning May Be a Question of When, Not If, 12/28/01
U.K. Outlaws Baby Cloning, 12/04/01
Cloning and Stem Cells Not Good Business, 12/04/01
Pope Condemns Human Embryo Cloning, 11/28/01
House Wants Cloning Ban Bill Passed, 11/28/01
Human Embryo Cloning Unsettles Bioethicists, 11/28/01
Cloning: Dolly Creator - U.S. Cloning Not a Breakthrough, 11/26/01
Cloning: Safety Fears May Not Hold, 11/23/01
Cloning: Still Waiting for the First Viable Human, 11/23/01
Scientists get baby cloning warning, 9/08/01
Will try again to clone his dead son, 8/19/01
Deaths, birth defects hover over animal cloning process, 8/15/01
Human cloning sparks fierce debate, 8/07/01
Cloning row doctor attacks 'criminal' Pope, 8/02/01
For additional information on cloning: National Academy of Sciences
Back to Top
Egg Bank
Help share gift of life, 4/19/03
Egg donation has hidden hurdles, 4/15/03
Egg Bank Offers Women Chance To Save While Awaiting Mr. Right
Back to Top
Embryo Adoption
Two frozen embryos put inheritance law to test, 5/28/03
Retain law on embryos, MPs urged, 4/28/03
Embryo Adoption, on the Rise, Is Still a Moral Question Mark, 4/7/03
Swiss lose count of surplus embryos, 4/3/03
Couples must choose destiny for frozen embryos with federal ban in mind, 3/28/03
Unused In Vitro Eggs May Go for Adoption, 5/15/02
Federal Embryo Adoption, 3/27/02
A Cold War on Embryo Adoptions, 3/22/02
Back to Top
Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Cell research may make ethics debate redundant, 4/25/03
Defective Embryos Eyed as Source of Stem Cells, 4/22/22
Dolly Creators Eye Human Embryos, 4/10/02
In Stem-Cell Research, It's Rule Britannia, 4/08/02
Australia PM Proposes Plan For Limited Stem Cell Research, 4/03/02
Researchers Make Stem Cells in Unfertilized Monkey Eggs, 1/31/02
Ultimate Stem Cell Reported Found in Adults, 1/24/02
German Bishops Oppose Importation of Embryonic Stem Cells, 1/23/02
French Pass Embryonic Research Bill, 1/22/02
Signs of Hope for the Unborn, 1/19/02
Lives in Limbo: Embryos on the Edge of Ethics, 12/08/01
Bush to Defend Stem Cell Policy, 9/05/01
Sweden Says Stem Cells to Be Shared, Not Sold, 8/30/01
Stem-cell techniques intertwine with cloning - and defining - human life, 8/19/01
Court Allows Mother to Dispose of Embryos, 8/14/01
Bush Threatens Stem Cell Veto, 8/13/01
...Adult Skin-Derived Stem Cell Research Reported, 8/13/01
Fundamentals of Stem Research, 8/10/01
Bush Backs Stem Cell research, 8/10/01
Poll Finds Half Approve of Bush's Stem-Cell Stance, 8/10/01
READ his lips. He lied..., 8/10/01
Stem of the Stem Cell Controversy, 8/10/01
Cell Claim Mystifies Scientists, 8/10/01
Bush's decision- the same gravity as sending American troops to war, 8/09/01
Reaction to Bush Decision on Stem-cell Research, 8/09/01
Back to Top
In Vitro Fertilization
IVF twins blunder clinic faces the axe, 5/30/03
Government to fund couples seeking fertility treatment, 5/3/03
How a family got a 'perfect daughter', 4/28/03
Young couple's fertility treatment heartbreak, 4/25/03
A Special Kind of Poverty, 4/20/03
Fertility treatments have resulted in an increase of couples having twins, 4/17/03
Risks of in-vitro fertilization, 4/16/03
IVF honesty urged, 4/16/03
'Designer baby' ban quashed, 4/8/03
Rights groups say Roma illegally sterilized, 4/2/03
Test Tube Babies Face Higher Risks, Study Says, 3/07/02
Frozen Ovary Banks To Offer Childbirth In Later Life..., 1/24/02
Report: In-Vitro Fertilization Challenges Sex, 1/16/02
IVF Parents Urged to Share Excess Embryos, 12/06/01
Back to Top
Womb Transplants
Saudi Surgeons Announce First Womb Transplant, 3/07/02
Men Redundant? Now We Don't Need Women Either, 2/10/02
"Artificial Womb" Seen as Step Toward Dehumanization, 2/11/02
Op-Eds/Commentaries
Cultural Conservative Leader Weyrich Calls Bush Stem Cell Decision Ethically and Politically Defensible
A man who has taken on Republican icons in the past and who has a sterling reputation for integrity said on Aug. 20 that the response of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' spokesman, Bishop Fiorenza, was "careless" and that "a reputable national group" he is usually allied with needs to improve its accuracy. Paul Weyrich, who helped found The Heritage Foundation and who has since 1977 headed the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, citing moral theologian William Marshner, joins the National Right to Life Committee in applauding the President in The Sound Logic Behind a Surprising Decision.
William L. Pierce, , President & Executive Director of the U.S.A. Committee for IAVAAN, August 22, 2001
Back to Top
Director of Leading "Embryo Adoption" Program Says Most Couples Hesitate to Allow Infertile Couples to Use their Embryos
Michael McManus, a former correspondent for TIME who has had his own syndicated column, “Ethics & Religion” since 1981, has a fascinating follow-up story in an essay scheduled to run this weekend, the U.S.A. Committee for IAVAAN has learned.
McManus, taking note of the mention of embryo adoption in the President’s speech on stem cell research, contacted a low-profile, university-based program that has already transferred fifty embryos to infertile women but has avoided hyping its work or getting involved in the recent stem cell controversy.
Dr. Bradley Van Voorhis, who directs the program at the University of Iowa, told McManus that there is a substantial demand for embryos for transfer to infertile couples. In a non-surprising echo of what pregnancy counselors often hear from unmarried pregnant women who decline to plan adoption, Voorhis said that the major problem is that some couples can’t bear the thought of their genetic offspring being raised by someone else.
The column also raises the question of why the President did not use his bully pulpit to ask citizens to volunteer to offer their embryos for adoption instead of destruction.
The pertinent section’s of McManus’ piece, excerpted with the permission of the columnist, appears below. McManus may be reached at MichaelJMcManus@CS.com.
The Following is An Excerpt from Mike McManus' Piece:
“What has been unreported is that there is ''far greater demand for embryos than supplies of them,'' according to Dr. Bradley Van Voorhis, Professor at the University of Iowa and director of a program that has planted 50 donated embryos in infertile women. Yet, sadly, many more embryos are being destroyed than implanted. Why?
The President partially explained the answer: In the process of in vitro fertilization, which helps many couples conceive children, ''When doctors match sperm and egg to create life outside the womb, they usually produce more embryos than are implanted in the mother. Once a couple successfully has children, or if they are unsuccessful, the additional embryos remain frozen in laboratories.''
The couple then has a choice. Will they allow the excess embryos to be implanted in other infertile women, or will they allow them to be donated to science or be destroyed? Relatively few choose to give them to other couples. Why? They ''are not thrilled about the idea of having a child that is genetically linked to them raised by someone else,'' Van Voorhis told me. This is pure selfishness. The President might have publicly urged donors to relinquish them for adoption rather than consent to their destruction.
Instead, he focused upon the embryos used to create privately funded stem cell lines that scientists believe offer great promise to improve the lives of those who suffer from such diseases as juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.” - Mike McManus
William L. Pierce, , President & Executive Director of the U.S.A. Committee for IAVAAN, August 17, 2001
Back to Top
State Legislatures Need to Take Action
The latest news on the status of human embryos created as a result of in vitro fertilization (IVF) suggests the need for action by state legislatures. In New Jersey, embryos created at the request of a married couple are now in peril. The father wants the embryos to be implanted in his new wife or given to a couple for "embryo adoption." The mother wants the embryos destroyed because she does not wish to be a parent in any sense without her express permission. The New Jersey ruling tracks the thinking of courts in other cases so it is unlikely that a planned appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court will be successful. What is needed at the least is state legislation which provides that as a condition of participating in IVF there is advance legal disposition of any and all "excess" embryos, with "embryo adoption" as the alternative. Any other approach will lend weight to the argument that since the embryos are going to be destroyed anyway, why not allow experimentation as the alternative. Unfortunately, the Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL), which might have appropriately addressed this and related issues in family law and new technologies, is flawed. NCCUSL refused to listen to calls for fine-tuning. Now privacy, adoption and civil liberties groups, among others, are opposing NCCUSL's UPA in the states.
William L. Pierce, President & Executive Director of the U.S.A. Committee for IAVAAN, 8/15/01
Back to Top
“Embryo adoption,” “stem cells” and public policy after the President’s decision
Like most Americans, the debate over embryonic stem cell research is something that has only registered with me in the last few months. Because most of my experience is in the field of child welfare, and more specifically in adoption, I was focused on in vitro fertilization (IVF), the ethical and practical issues related to IVF, and so-called “embryo adoption” which has some of the characteristics of “surrogate parenting.” Ever since I officially retired from twenty years as the President of the National Council For Adoption and joined the Discovery Institute as a Senior Fellow, one of my major research activities has been looking at the various ramifications of “embryo adoption.”
I was still in the midst of talking with experts and reading the views of people across the spectrum when the controversy over federal funding for stem cell research on embryos came to a boil and the July 17 and July 18 Congressional hearings were called. I wrote a letter to the editor of The Washington Times, which appeared July 17, asking the President to stick to his campaign promise. Because “embryo adoption” was being cited as a preferred alternative to experimenting on or outright disposing of so-called “excess” embryos, I drafted separate statements to be inserted into the record of each hearing. And then, like most Americans, I waited for the President to make his decision. While waiting, I urged every White House and Congressional contact during public meetings and in private to ask the President to keep his promise.
The President’s announcement of his decision about federal funding for embryonic stem cell research was made in a densely-worded statement to the U.S.A. – and the world – on August 9. And immediately confusion reigned, as most of those asked by the television networks to comment revealed. Whether one was watching CNN’s “Larry King Live” or EWTN, there seemed, at least initially, to be a puzzling, positive consensus. Larry King, for one, could hardly believe what he was hearing.
Not until “Hardball” host Chris Matthews weighed in did the fog begin to lift. And when Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops came on, the stark reality that a line had been crossed was made clear to viewers. As the evening progressed (I watched various programs for three hours), the lines between the two camps clearly emerged.
One camp sees the President’s position as signaling an opening for a political process that will, sooner or later, likely lead to full-blown federally-funded experimentation on human embryos, aimed at finding treatments or cures for all sorts of medical problems. In the process, the barriers to federally-funded reproductive experimentation, including human cloning, may quite likely fall.
Many of those in the other camp had realistically looked at the defections of usually reliable allies in the Congress and glumly concluded that the stem cell research battle was lost. I admit to being guardedly optimistic to the last. Reading the signs at least a week earlier from key Congressional leaders and The First Lady, many of us were prepared for the President’s disappointing decision. Neither the frequent and welcome references to “life,” or the reference to “embryo adoption,” nor the appointment of Leon Kass to head a President’s council to monitor the stem cell research were any real consolation. In the struggle to define one of the most important ethical issues imaginable, media spin and a lack of broad Congressional leadership had taken their toll. Not even the sense some of us have that the President’s statement to some degree echoed the words spoken by the Pope when the two met in person really helped. If, in the narrowest technical sense, the President did not break his campaign promise, and if, considering the alternative positions the President might have taken, the situation could be worse, one fact remains. That fact is that a critical line has been crossed and those who were urging the President to cross that line are clapping their hands and preparing to enlarge the opening the President has given them.
Now the next phase of the ethical debate begins, as some of us, deeply disappointed but recognizing that we must battle on, begin to prayerfully contemplate the full range of our policy, political and other options.
I, for one, intend to continue asking questions about all the implications, including the public policy implications, of “embryo adoption” now that the President mentioned it approvingly in his speech to the American people. Even before his speech, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) had announced his intention to seek federal funding for embryo adoption. Some of those questions also need to be asked by Dr. Kass’ Presidential council, especially given the fact that a rush to endorse some current approaches could lead to teaming up with some entities with questionable professional and ethical track records.
It appears that reproductive technology in lieu of adoption of children conceived in utero helped paint policy makers into an ethical corner. All those “excess” embryos are a perfect alibi for the crime of human experimentation. Therefore, it is critical that all those who have raised questions about the negative aspects of assisted reproductive technologies, wherever they fall on the ideological spectrum, work together to prevent the “hatcheries” of Huxley’s Brave New World – or worse nightmares – from becoming reality.
William L. Pierce, Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute For Public Policy, August 10, 2001
Back to Top
Was President Bush Listening to Criminal Quackery?
Because of the controversy over bioethics, and the fact that the topics of "cloning" and "stem cell research" are directly related to "adoption," the U.S.A. Committee for IAVAAN has received calls and emails about the issue. For those who are not following the debate, the Aug. 7 Panel on Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Cloning, sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences (of the U.S.A.) featured a discussion, at 1 p.m., of "Reproductive Cloning in Humans." Dr. Severino Antinori, an Italian physician, spoke at length about his view that reproductive cloning is no different than in vitro fertilization (IVF). Brigitte Boisselier, who heads the off-shore lab for the Raelians' project, called Clonaid, also talked about the right of people to reproduce however they wish. Most of the experts present blasted Antinoir, Boisselier and Kentucky reproductive entrepreneur Panayiotis Zavos, as at least some of the media coverage from Aug. 8 reports. The connection of stem cell research to adoption is that one of the reasons the so-called "excess" human embryos are being targeted to be killed in the name of potential cures is that IVF, at least as currently practiced, inevitably leads to "excess" embryos. The issues of cloning and stem cell research are inextricably intertwined. My hope is that President Bush caught some of the coverage from the media circus and will conclude, as I have, that this is criminal quackery masquerading as sympathetic science.
William L. Pierce, , President & Executive Director for U.S.A. Committee for IAVAAN, August 8, 2001
IAVAAN's Extras on Bioethics
Bioethical concerns touch on many practices relating to children and families, ranging from so-called “surrogate parenting” to stem cell research through embryo adoption. As the debates about the various bioethical issues becomes ever more complex, there is a need for information and clarifying context and IAVAAN has had this as one of its goals since 2001.
*Some news services may only keep certain articles online for a short time period. We apologize if any links within our EXTRAS have expired.
To view all the EXTRAS from 2001-2003 please click here
2002
Dec. 26, 2002 - Jan 01, 2003
In Vitro Fertilization May Cause Rare Cancers, Researchers Discover
December 13-15, 2002 The Next Step: Eating Human Eggs?
November 11, 2002 Critics Want To Take The "Adoption" Out Of Sen. Specter's "Embryo Adoption Initiative"
October 31, 2002 Embryos Get New Status, Provoke Debate
October 8, 2002
Infertility Industry Begins Mental Health Counseling On Some Of The Issues Related To Treatment Options
October 4-6, 2002
Grants Announced For Specter "Embryo Adoption" Effort
Sept. 13 - Sept. 15, 2002
Infertile Couples From India Favor IVF Over Adoption
August 29, 2002
Insurance Premiums Underwrite Increased In Vitro Fertilization Use
August 21, 2002
U.S. Government Prepares To Implement Sen. Specter's "Embryo Adoption" Public Awareness Campaign
July 3-4, 2002
Invalid Studies, Misleading Headlines: The Sad State Of Research On Parenting And Assisted Reproductive Technologies
May 22, 2002
Alternative Families Spur Change In Privacy Rules For Sperm Donors
May 15, 2002
Yahoo's Misleading Headline About Catholic Baptism For Baby Conceived Through "Surrogacy"
May 6, 2002
“Ovum Banks” Promoted While Frozen Embryos Languish
April 10, 2002
Sen. Frist Likely To Sway Senate Cloning Ban Vote
April 1, 2002
How Do You "Sign" the Word "Narcissistic?"
February 12, 2002
Artificial Wombs Loom: Brave New World At Last?
February 8-10, 2002
U.S., Swedish Experts Warn of Risks in Assisted Reproduction
February 4, 2002
Canada Hoping To Close Surrogacy Loophole
January 4-6, 2002
Fertility Inc. Or Public Relations Inc. In the New York Times
2001
December 5, 2001
Failed Federal Oversight for Many in Baby-Making Industry
November 30 - December 2, 2001
Partisan Infertility Bills?
October 16, 2001
"Womb Swapping?" - Latest Medical Outrage
August 29, 2001
Poll of U.S. Muslims Shows Support for Stem Cell Research
August 22, 2001
Cultural Conservative Leader Weyrich Calls Bush Stem Cell Decision Ethically and Politically Defensible
August 17, 2001
Director of Leading "Embryo Adoption" Program Says Most Couples Hesitate to Allow Infertile Couples to Use their Embryos
August 15, 2001
In Vitro Fertilization: State Legislatures Need to Take Action
August 10, 2001
“Embryo Adoption,” “Stem Cells” and Public Policy After the President’s Decision
August 8, 2001
Was President Bush Listening to Criminal Quackery?
August 7, 2001
Bartlette's Compromise: Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research
h