"...there seems to be no morally licit solution regarding the
human destiny of the thousands of 'frozen' embryos which are and remain
the subjects of essential rights and should therefore be protected by
law as human persons." Pope John Paul II, 1996.
"We need to look at these cryogenic tanks as frozen orphanages
rather than some kind of material that scientists can manipulate for
whatever reason they would like to." Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), 2001
"Looking into Hannah's eyes, I weep for the roughly 188,000
frozen human embryos like her placed in frozen-embryo orphanages who
could be adopted rather than terminated with my federal tax dollars."
Marlene Strege, testifying at a congressional hearing in 2001. She is
the mother of Hannah who developed from an adopted embryo.
Background:
In order to understand why the surplus embryos represent a serious
concern to some people, it is necessary to
study the basics of human personhood, the activities
of the pro-life community, and procedures performed in fertility clinics:
When does personhood begin? No consensus exists about when
human life becomes a human person.
Human life can be defined as any living entity that contains human DNA.
Thus, each adult or child skin cell, spermatozoa, a woman's ovum, a just-fertilized egg, a pre-embryo
which consists of a group of identical stem cells, an embryo which
consists of differentiated cells, a fetus, and
a newborn are all forms of human life. But human life is not necessarily
considered to be a human person by everyone.
Most pro-choicers believe that the transition from human life to
human personhood is achieved part way through pregnancy, or perhaps at
birth. Thus, the value and status of an pre-embryo lies in its ability for
future development into a human person, if it is given the proper environment.
A pre-embryo is respected because of its future potential, but is not
assigned the status of a human person at that stage. It is seen as one step beyond that
of an ovum or spermatozoa towards personhood. Some view it as a collection
of live, human cells containing human DNA -- much like a microscopic piece
of adult skin.
People are not usually concerned about the loss human DNA
posed by hundreds of thousands of spermatozoa in a single male
ejaculation, or the rejection by the woman's body of an unfertilized egg
approximately every four weeks. So also, many pro-choice person do not assign
major
importance to pre-embryos. The existence of hundreds of thousands of
frozen pre-embryos in fertility clinics is thus of little concern to
them -- at least in comparison to other moral issues such as sexism,
racism, homophobia, child abuse, etc.
Pro-lifers generally regard the
start of human personhood as occurring at or shortly after conception. A strict pro-life position would thus regard all of the following as possibly causing the murder
of human person(s):
Insertion of an Intra-Uterine Device (IUD). This generally prevents
fertilization of ova, but can in some instances change the environment of the uterus to bar the
"implantation of a fertilized egg." 1
Emergency contraception (a.k.a. the Morning-After Pill) which
generally prevents ovulation or conception. In rare instances, it can
prevent the
implantation of an already-fertilized egg.
Discarding unwanted, "surplus" pre-embryos in fertility clinics,
and allowing them to die.
Harvesting the stem cells from a pre-embryo, and thus causing its
death.
Many pro-lifers look at the inventory of frozen embryos in a fertility
clinic as a potential adoption facility. Some would view the harvesting
of stem cells as ethically equivalent to Nazi medical experimentations
during the Holocaust.
Primary pro-life activities: Although IUDs cause tens of
millions of deaths of fertilized embryos each year in North America --
many more than the 1 to 1.5 million surgical abortions -- little pro-life
activity has focused on the use of IUDs. Their main effort has been to reduce or
eliminate women's access to emergency contraception, surgical abortions,
and RU-486. Another area had been almost completely overlooked, was the destruction of human life in
fertility clinics. This has achieved a higher profile since the stem
cell issue surfaced.
What happens in a fertility clinics? When a woman undergoes
in-vitro fertilization, she is given medication that causes her to
produce perhaps two dozen mature ova. These are extracted and then
fertilized, usually with sperm provided by her husband or male partner. About three days
later, surviving embryos are at the blastocyst stage -- a collection of 4 to 10
cells.
This photograph shows a seven-cell embryo
held between two miro-pipettes. Portions of six cells
can be seen; the seventh is out of view behind the remaining cells. Two
to five days after fertilization, two
to four embryos are implanted in the woman's womb, in the hope that one
or two will develop into a single newborn or twins. The rest are quickly
deep frozen in liquid nitrogen for potential future use.
These are sometimes called "pre-embryos." They have no brain, central
nervous system, mouth, heart, lungs, or other internal organs. They
have no organs to see, hear, touch, taste; they lack a body, head, arms,
legs; they have no self awareness, memory, thought processes, or
consciousness. They are smaller than a pin-prick. They consist of a number
of identical, undifferentiated cells which contain human DNA. They do have the
potential to grow into fetuses and become newborn babies if they are
implanted into a uterus. Many, probably
most, pro-lifers
believe that they are human persons with souls. Many skeptics argue that souls
do not exist -- in either embryos or adult people.
Handling the surplus embryos: There is no simple way to dispose of the excess embryos. Occasionally,
an infertile couple will need to go back for a second try at achieving a pregnancy.
This happens when the first procedure did not produce a pregnancy, or
when the couple wants to have an additional child. Two to four additional embryos are
then removed from storage, thawed out, and
implanted. But even when that happens, perhaps 16 of the couple's embryos will
still remain frozen. The surplus embryos will almost inevitably be eventually destroyed.
Some do not survive the freezing process. Perhaps 50% will die during
storage or thawing. Equipment malfunction,
perhaps after decades of storage, might destroy hundreds of embryos. Some clinics
simply dispose of surplus embryos without freezing them.
These are surplus embryos:
Most couples are fertile and can have children on their own. They have no need
for
embryos.
Infertile
couples also normally have no use for the surplus embryos. They can have the clinic implant an
new embryo which they form in the lab:
From the
woman's ovum and/or her partners sperm, if this is possible.
From the man's sperm and ova from another woman.
Most infertile women and couples find this a preferred route, because the
resultant child will genetically be partly their/her own.
Sometimes women are artificially inseminated. Again, this does
not involve a surplus embryo.
A very few surplus embryos are donated to research. Their stem cells
are removed for
research. The embryos die in the process.
A new option has been developed, and is being actively promoted by
some religious conservatives: embryo adoption.
Sponsored link:
Embryo adoption (a.k.a. pre-birth adoption)
The term "adoption" has traditionally meant a legal process by which an
individual or a couple becomes the parent of an existing newborn or child.
Recently, its meaning has been extended to include the acceptance by an individual or
couple of embryos for implantation in the woman's uterus with the hope of producing a
newborn. This typically involves the use of a few surplus cryopreserved
(frozen) embryos that were left over from previous in-vitro fertilization
procedures on other couples.
This is a new solution for couples or individuals "who want to share a
pregnancy experience and have neither eggs nor sperm to contribute to that
process." Adopted embryos would most likely be implanted in:
Infertile women.
Single, fertile, heterosexual women who do not have a male partner.
Lesbians.
Advantages to the woman (and her partner, if any) compared to regular
adoption:
She experiences the joys of pregnancy. They have the opportunity to
bond with the embryo and fetus before it is born.
The procedure can be much quicker than an adoption. With the
scarcity of eligible children, adoption might
take many years to arrange.
The mother-to-be has control over the pregnancy. Some children who
are available for adoption have suffered from inadequate pre-natal medical
attention, the use of street drugs by the mother, etc.
Embryo adoption would literally save the life of a number of embryos. To strict pro-lifers, "surplus" frozen
embryos are not simply human life; they are full "pre-born human beings."
2 To them, each embryo adoption would save the life of a
human person.
The clinic may supply her with more medical, social and
psychological data about the donors than she might be able to obtain
from an adoption agency.
She may take greater comfort in knowing that the embryo was formed
as a result of another loving couple's attempts to become pregnant. The
conception of many adopted children are accidental and unintended, or
may even have been the result of rape or incest.
Depending upon the clinic's regulations, she may have some choice in selecting suitable donors.
3
Embryo adoption provides an opportunity
for older women to become pregnant. "For women over 45, the
chance of her embryo becoming a baby is almost zero. The inability to
make embryos that become babies is why couples turn to donor eggs or
donor sperm." 15
Disadvantages:
The resultant child is genetically unrelated to the woman or the
couple.
She experiences the discomfort of pregnancy, pain of childbirth, and
economic dislocation of having a baby.
Her health insurance may not pay for all of the costs
involved. 3
She cannot choose the child's gender.
Since there is a low chance that a given embryo will
produce a pregnancy, 4 three (or sometimes four)
embryos are implanted at a time. Thus, there is a significant chance
that multiple births will result.
There may be serious disappointment if the implantation fails
to produce a viable embryo.
The field of embryo adoption is so new that legislation has not
caught up with it. As of mid-2005, no state has legislation covering
embryo adoptions. Future problems may develop over the maternity and paternity of the
child/children.
The embryos most likely to produce a successful pregnancy have been
implanted in the donor woman's uterus. The ones left over are of lesser
quality.
Frozen embryos degrade with time. "The chance they will grow to
full term is about one in 10 for those frozen less than five years, and
even less for those that have been frozen longer." 15
At about 10,000 per try, few couples are
willing to use lower grade embryos obtainable through "embryo adoption."
In 2002, the U.S. federal Department of Health and Human Services' Office
of Public Health and Science (OPHS) made available to agencies $900,000 in
funding to develop public awareness campaigns on embryo adoption. 5,6
Applications had to be submitted prior to 2002-AUG.
Fertility Plus lists clinics and organizations which provide, promote,
or facilitate embryo adoption. 7
Numbers of available embryos and embryo adoptions:
As of 2002-Fall, most experts estimate that there are over 110,000 frozen, stored surplus frozen
human embryos currently stored in IVF clinics in the
U.S. alone. One fertility specialist estimated in excess of 200,000. 8
Two other sources estimated 400,000.
14,15
In 2001-JUL, JoAnn L. Davidson, the program director for Snowflakes
Embryo Adoption Program estimated 188,000. 9 The
number appears to be growing steadily.
Assuming that 200,000 embryos are in storage, about 100,000 would
probably be still viable if they were thawed. If implanted in women, this
would produce about 33,000 newborns.
Not all embryos are available for
adoption. The consent of both the woman and man who donated the genetic material
is required. Many, probably almost all, donors refuse their permission.
One reason is that "the couple may be reluctant to undergo a
rigorous and costly group of screening procedures." 10
Another is that they might simply feel uncomfortable about another son
or daughter of theirs being born.
"Many potential donors are uncomfortable with someone else raising
their biological offspring." 11
There is no central registry which maintains records of all embryo
adoptions. We have been unable to find a reliable estimate of the number
of embryo adoptions:
An article in Dignity magazine refers to "Many" adoptions having
been made. 2
Another report states that "embryo adoptions are rare." 11
Judging by the number of Internet links, news items in conservative
Christian publications, mention on both conservative Christian and secular radio &
TV programs, congressional testimony, etc., the Snowflakes program run by Nightlight
Christian Adoptions in California appears to be the main agency providing embryos
for adoption. Their program started in 1997. They report that 18 children
had been born into 13 families by 2002-Summer.
In the absence of accurate information, we would guess that the total
rate of embryo adoptions in the U.S. is probably fewer than a dozen per
year. This is in spite of:
Aggressive publicity by many Fundamentalist
and other Evangelical religious organizations -- primarily Focus on the Family.
12,13
Federal government funding of over $1
million to Snowflakes alone.
The ethics of government involvement:
Dr. Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the
University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, PA wrote that embryo
adoption is a sham:
"The Bush administration and Congress know all
these facts, but have nevertheless poured more than $1 million of
taxpayer money into the Snowflakes program and others aimed at
facilitating 'embryo adoption'."
"This is a nice way to score points with those
who advocate the view that embryos are actual babies and should not be
used for research purposes. But it is not the best way to help couples
who want to have actual babies."
"One million dollars would be far better spent
matching fertile couples willing to make embryos with infertile couples,
rather than trying to get them to use unhealthy frozen ones."
"One million dollars could also help defray the
staggering costs of IVF, which only middle- and upper-class couples can
currently afford."
"But when the money is spent on programs like
Snowflakes, the only explanation is ideology not medicine." 15
Dr. Jeffrey P. Kahn,
Director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of
Minnesota wrote:
"For the federal government to fund programs to exclusively encourage
donation to other couples is to use public money to endorse a particular
view about the status of embryos and what should be done with them."
"Most important, it is a step away from couples controlling the fate
of their embryos, and toward viewing embryos as needing government
protection and the help of groups that seek to "place" them with caring
families. The way we're heading, it's a short step to lab freezers being
called orphanages, and social workers assigned to look after the
interests of their frozen charges. Is it cold in here, or is it just
me?" 16
Success rates with embryo implantation:
A study published online by the journal Fertility and Sterility found
that:
Women who became pregnant after implantation with frozen embryos
donated by other couples became pregnant and were able to carry at least
one baby to term in 35.5% of the cases.
Women who used her and her husband's own frozen embryos had at least
one successful birth from 22 to 32% of the time.
Dr. Jeffrey Keenan, medical director of the National Embryo Donation
Center, said:
"We’ve had embryos that have been frozen for 14 years that have
resulted in normal pregnancies and children. We don’t have a time limit
on how long these embryos can be frozen." 17
"Funding Available For 'Embryo Adoption' Public Awareness
Campaigns," American Society of Reproductive Medicine, ASRM
Bulletin, Vol. 4, #32, 2002-JUL-28. Online at:
http://www.asrm.org/Washington/Bulletins
JoAnn L. Davidson, "Testimony of JoAnn L. Davidson, Given July
17, 2001 United States House of Representatives Committee on Government
Reform Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human
Resources Hearing on Embryonic Cell Research," at:
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/
"Frozen embrhos: The adoption solution," Focus on the Family,
undated, at:
http://www.family.org/topics/pdfs/FX429.pdf. You need software to
read these files. It can be obtained free from:
A search of the Focus on the Family website (http://www.family.org)
for "embryo adoption" returned 11 hits.
Andis Robeznieks, "Researchers ponder best use of 400,000 stored embryos"
American Medical News, 2003-JUN-16, at:
http://www.ama-assn.org/
[Paid access required]
Arthur Caplan, "The problem with 'embryo adoption.' Why is the
government giving money to 'Snowflakes'?" MSNBC, 2003-JUN-24, at:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
Jeffrey Kahn, " 'Adoption' of frozen embryos a loaded term,"
CNN.com, 2002-SEP-17, at:
http://archives.cnn.com/
"Embryo Adoption Gives Couples a Chance to Become Parents," Family
News in Focus, 2008-MAR-03, at:
http://www.citizenlink.org/
