I believe that the main pro of in vitro fertilization (IVF) is that parents who are originally unable to conceive have the opportunity to experience parenthood and bring new life into the world. However a major con of this process, is that unused embryos are typically disposed. Catholic teaching states that human life begins at the moment of conception, when the egg and sperm unite to form an embryo. In IVF that union occurs in a petri dish. When doctors create these unions, several embryos are formed, but the ones that go unused are either frozen or destroyed. For the Church, the destruction or demise of an embryo during the IVF process is the unnatural ending of a human life, similar to an abortion. Additionally, treatments such as IVF can be extremely expensive. In the article, the Burnetts went through IVF 11 times at a total cost of more than $100,000, with no success. They spent so much of their money on a procedure that did not even reward them with a child.
I think the Church makes several valid points in their teachings on IVF. Dignitas Personae, particularly, explains that all IVF procedures threaten or actually end the life of an embryo. However, I cannot help but put myself in the shoes of the infertile parents. If I were ever in such a predicament, I think that IVF may be a viable option for myself and my spouse. God put men and women on this Earth to spread His message of unconditional love through procreation. If I was biologically unable to have a child of my own, I would want to use the science available to fulfill God's vision. After all, He must have created the men and women who invented the science behind IVF.
The cost of IVF somewhat impacts my opinion on the morality of the practice. Because the procedure is so expensive, only very wealthy couples can afford to create a child of their own through medical means. Middle-class and poorer couples cannot pay for such an exorbitant process. Does this mean that only wealthy infertile couples should be able to have children of their own? If a couple wants to have a baby that is biologically their own, they should have access to every means available, regardless of their financial status.
In the movie He's Just Not That Into You, a variety of individuals deal with a multitude of romantic issues. Two couples in the movie particularly caught my attention, because many of the problems they dealt with are related to our course material. The relationship between Gigi and Alex, as well as the problems suffered by Beth and Neil are quite relevant.
Gigi is a single woman who repeatedly misreads "signals" from her dates. She perceives every kind gesture from a man as an indication that he is romantically interested in her. She befriends Alex when she stalks another man, Connor, to a bar. There, Alex reveals to Gigi that there are several strategies men use to avoid a woman. He explains that if a man is interested in a woman, he will find a way to see her again. Neither Alex nor Gigi exhibit healthy dating skills at the start of the movie. Gigi constantly seeks out men to make her happy, because deep down, she is insecure. Because of this, the overanalyzes every move a guy makes and is absolutely desperate for affirmation. It is not until Alex gives her a reality check that she begins to gain confidence and security in herself. I do not think Alex's approach to dating is necessarily good either. He sees women as "disposable," because he believes that there are plenty more women out there just like them. He fears commitment, and is very hesitant to put himself out there. He is unwilling to be vulnerable, because he has seen vulnerability take a negative toll on the people around him. Although being vulnerable may lead to pain, a lack of vulnerability will never lead to love and intimacy.
Beth and Neil are another couple in the movie who can be related to course material. After seven years together, Beth wants to get married, but Neil does not believe in marriage. Although they live together, Beth believes marriage is necessary to consecrate their union. But, when she confronts Neil about this, he is insistent upon not marrying, and they break up. I think this situation highlights the dangers of cohabitation. Beth had always thought Neil would want to marry her, so she stuck around until her impatience got the best of her. However, as the movie progressed, Beth saw that Neil had been a better husband to her than her sisters' real husbands. She finally recognizes that the relationship they share is everything she could ever hope for from a marriage, built on trust, respect, and loyalty. An important message that I took away from this couple was that a marriage licence is not the only thing that can consecrate a bond between two people. Everyday acts of kindness, support, and love are essential to an affectionate and committed relationship.
