Oncofertility pp 261-278 | Cite as

Bioethics and Oncofertility: Arguments and Insights from Religious Traditions

Chapter
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 156)

Abstract

This chapter seeks to explain our preliminary reflections on how different religious communities might use their texts and traditions to respond to and assess the ethics of oncofertility research and technologies. Specifically, this chapter will briefly explore the Catholic, Evangelical Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and Buddhist traditions and their anticipated or potential contributions to the ethical discourse surrounding oncofertility. The chapter will sketch a few characteristic principles and describe some preliminary responses from practitioners that may guide each religion’s traditional stances toward reproductive technologies and procreation. The material presented herein builds upon exploratory research by two classes of undergraduate students at Northwestern University. The author’s additional research sought out additional sources and considered additional religious traditions. The students’ research included interviews with local ministers, rabbis, faith communities, including campus ministers, and also student participants in various religious traditions. The clergy, intrigued by the questions raised by the research, suggested some of the preliminary sources and general directions pursued in this chapter.

Keywords

Infertility Egypt Haas 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Oncofertility Consortium NIH 8UL1DE019587, 5RL1HD058296. We thank the undergraduate students in the winter 2008 and fall 2008 quarters of the Religion and Bioethics class of Northwestern University and Victor O’Halloran, a summer intern for the Oncofertility Consortium, for their assistance in researching and preparing material for this chapter. We also thank Sarah Rodriguez, Lisa Campo-Engelstein, and Bryan Breau for reading earlier drafts of this chapter.

References

  1. 1.
    Freedman B. Duty and healing: foundations of a Jewish bioethic. New York: Routledge; 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Instruction. Dignitas Personae on Certain Bioethical Questions. September 8, 2008; http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html. Accessed August 31, 2009.
  3. 3.
    Haas JM. Begotten Not Made: A Catholic View of Reproductive Technology. http://www.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/98rlphaa.shtml. Accessed August 29, 2009.
  4. 4.
    Verhey A. Focus: evangelical voices. Introduction. J Relig Ethics. 1989; 17(2):77–9.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals. Defining the Term in Contemporary Times. http://isae.wheaton.edu/defining-evangelicalism/defining-the-term-in-contemporary-times/. Accessed August 30, 2009.
  6. 6.
    National Association of Evangelicals. http://www.nae.net/index.cfm. Accessed August 30, 2009.
  7. 7.
    General Council of the Assemblies of God. Infertility. http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/relations_16_infertility.cfm. Accessed August 28, 2009.
  8. 8.
    Powell CMH. Respecting ethical boundaries in reproductive medicine. Enrichment J. 2008(Summer). http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200803/200803_140_EthicsMedicine.cfm. Accessed August 28, 2009.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Allen B. Southern baptist leader says in-vitro fertilization immoral. Ethicsdaily.com. January 16, 2008.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Connolly J. Top US. Evangelical leader: all involved with IVF responsible for “Vast Human Tragedy”. LifeSiteNews.com. January 11, 2008.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sachedina A. Islamic perspectives on research with human embryonic stem cells. Ethical issues in human stem cell research: religious Perspectives. Rockville: The National Bioethics Advisory Commission; June 2000:G-1–G-6.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gatrad AR, Sheikh A. Medical ethics and Islam: principles as practice. Arch Dis Child. 2001; 84(1):72–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Inhorn MC. Making Muslim babies: IVF and gamete donation in Sunni Versus Shi’a Islam. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2006; 30(4):427–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ebrahim AFM. Biomedical issues: islamic perspective. Kuala Lumpur: A.S. Noordeen; 1993.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mackler AL. Is there a unique Jewish bioethics of human reproduction? Annu Soc Christ Ethics. 2001; 21:319–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dorff E. A Jewish approach to assisted reproductive technologies. Whittier Law Rev. 1999; 21(2):391–400.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Biale R. Women and Jewish law: the essential texts, their history, and their relevance for today. New York: Schocken Books Inc; 1995.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Davis DS. Beyond Rabbi Hiyya’s wife: women’s voices in Jewish bioethics. Second Opin. 1991; 16:10–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dorff EN. Is there a unique Jewish ethics? The role of law in Jewish bioethics. Annu Soc Christ Ethics. 2001; 21:305–17.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schenker JG. Infertility evaluation and treatment according to Jewish law. Eur J Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 71:113–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bhattacharyya S. Magical progeny, modern technology: a hindu bioethics of assisted reproductive technology. Albany: State University of New York Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Widge A. Sociocultural attitudes towards infertility and assisted reproduction in India. Current Practices and Controversies in Assisted Reproduction. 2002. https://www.who.int/reproductive-health/infertility/11.pdf. Accessed August 30, 2009.
  24. 24.
    Harvey P. An introduction to Buddhist ethics: foundations, values and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Keown D. Buddhism & bioethics. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 1995.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Numrich PD. The problem with sex according to Buddhism. Dialog: Journal of Theology. 2009; 48(1):62–73.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taniguchi S. Biomedical ethics from a Buddhist perspective. Pacific World New Series. 1987; 3(Fall):75–83.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Bioethics, Science and SocietyNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Religious StudiesNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations