I guess I just saw the blanket declaration of IVF being totally wrong as a statement lacking grace, understanding, compassion, and one that closes ears to anything else Moore might say. It came across as legalistic, holier than thou, and lacking compassion on those who wrestle with the implications of infertility. And the argument that one who uses that violates the relationship between love and procreation is utterly wrong. Anyone who has gone through infertility testing knows just how much love a husband must have for his wife to go through the rather embarrassing tests and procedures involved.

What breaks my heart is that so many godly men read this blog and take it to heart. And if they are pastors and turn around and share this belief with their congregation, how many families will they wound? IVF has very real ethical dilemmas, as does ANY and every part of pregnancy and childbirth. It would be far more beneficial to teach one how to wade through each issue and come out honoring Jesus while at the same time taking advantage of a tool that can indeed be beneficial.

Embryos are persons, created in the image of God, as are those that have already been born. All, equally human.

One major difference is that those who have been “frozen” have absolutely no possibility of life apart from that provided through embryo adoption. They will certainly eventually die, if not adopted.

It is incredibly difficult to form priorities as we navigate our lives in a fallen world, but we each do form these priorities and need to live with the consequences.

We are a family that have adopted both post birth and embryo adoption…and I’m not sure I would be prepared to say that any of my children should have had priority over the others.

When we first learned of our infertility 15 years ago, we were told it was impossible for us to conceive. About 2 years ago we were advised that technology had improved to the point where we may now possibly be able to conceive (with medical intervention). As we had recently learned of embryo adoption, our hearts cried out for the “little ones” who had no hope, and we decided to not pursue conception using our own sperm and eggs. We couldn’t bring ourselves to even think about conceiving ourselves, when there were already tiny, tiny little ones that needed a home and a family.

But, that is us…and others may (and likely will) think differently…and that is a good thing.

May the Lord grant us all great wisdom and grace as we pursue Him, and endeavour to follow His will. And may he grant mercy to all the fatherless and motherless.

Phil

There is a slight but damaging fallacy in the arguments against IV fertilization procedures raised here. The “normal” and “acceptable” practice is as stated selective, thus causing the loss of life of embryos deemed unsatisfactory and/or the freezing of embryos not chosen to implant. This, however, is not necessitated in the choice for IV pregnancy. Although more expensive (insurance will cover only standard procedures) and sometimes difficult to find a provider for (many doctors will not step outside the practices listed for fear of suits by disatisfied customers), it can be done by fertilizing and implanting only the eggs harvested during a single procedure.

I have a good friend who has twin daughters that pursued this course and found a doctor who was willing to abide by their moral stipulations. My friend is a staunch Christian and a biology teacher to boot.

I would agree with objections raised to the practice of IV fertilization as it is normally carried out for the same reasons Moore and the others posting do, but I would argue that it is possible to pursue this course morally–if with difficulty.

Because IVF is selective. Many embryos are “created” but only a 1-2 are “selected” for implantation. Other concerns abound too:

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/09/06/pro-life-concerns-about-ivf-include-abortion-exploitation/

As you have aptly mentioned, these are persons - created in the image of God.

The difficulty as I recall it - is in overlaying what is a very scientific, data-driven process, with the mystery that is conception and childbirth. The “quality” of the embryos is rated, and a number chosen to give the best chance of having one child. You can see that dilemma. Then, weeks later when the news that more than one (but not all, mind you) of the children are thriving, you’re given the option of “embryo reduction” for multiple reasons. We were resolved from the start not to choose that option - and thankfully have three healthy little prayer warriors as a result.

We don’t always tell people where our kids came from - but we thank God every day for placing them in our care. Grace and Peace to you! ~ John

As someone who is planning to pursue embryo adoption, this is a topic I have looked into a great deal. Of course the children who are already born should be a priority, though I am not sure that they should be a “higher” priority.

Here’s why: embryos have a limited time in which they are viable. Estimates on how long that is vary - anywhere from 5 years to 10. By the time a family with remaining embryos comes to the point emotionally that they are ready to part with their embryos, oftentimes several years have passed…meaning there is potentially only a short window (or at the very least, no guaranteed time) that they would be viable. So, in essence, these embryos are in need of rescue, in some ways moreso than a child who is already born.

My two cents. :)

This is a hard concept to consider (for me at least). I also wonder what the long-term effects of cryogenic storage are. Perhaps we should feel an urgency to rescue these children from scientific slavery? To think that there are souls attached to these embryos baffles me.

Thanks for your ministry and commitment to orphan care.