This morning Michael Smerconish interviewed Doctor Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist from Penn on the subject of 'surplus' embryos resulting from In Vitro Fertilization procedures. The following is an e-mail sent to both Michael and Arthur challenging two of the statements made during that interview.
Michael and Arthur
On this morning's radio show there were two statements made that I wish to contest, both of them in the context of solutions to the 400k 'surplus' embryos.
The first was essentially that there is no solution between accepting the discarding of these embryos and shutting down the IVF clinics. While shutting down the IVF clinics would be my choice I recognize that that horse has already left the barn. (As a side issue pro-lifers did fight that battle hard before losing so I resent charges of hypocrisy.)
However, contrary to Art's statement, there is an intermediate solution. The solution used in Germany and elsewhere is No More Eggs Fertilized Than Will Be Implanted In A Single Cycle. While this does not address the existing 400k embryos it would eliminate further growth of that number, to which Art alluded. Objections to such a solution would be based primarily on economics.
The second statement, again with associated charges of hypocrisy by Michael, is that pro-lifers do not object to the discarding of those 'surplus' embryos while we do object to their being killed in medical experiments. At this point Art, you shirked your responsibility as a bioethicist to point out to Michael and his audience that there is an important ethical difference between the action of killing and the inaction of allowing to die. The term 'discard' allows people to confuse that difference.
While this is a complex area the use of emotionally chrged terms such as hypocrisy and misunderstandable terms such as 'discard' and 'surplus' is less than helpful.
Incidentally I am going to publish this letter on our blog so I invite your comments.
Sincerely,
Brad O'Brien
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)