Bioethics and Oncofertility: Arguments and Insights from Religious Traditions
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.
KeywordsAssisted Reproductive Technology Religious Tradition Fertility Preservation Oocyte Cryopreservation Religious Perspective
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.
- 1.Freedman B. Duty and healing: foundations of a Jewish bioethic. New York: Routledge; 1999.Google Scholar
- 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.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.Verhey A. Focus: evangelical voices. Introduction. J Relig Ethics. 1989; 17(2):77–9.Google Scholar
- 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.National Association of Evangelicals. http://www.nae.net/index.cfm. Accessed August 30, 2009.
- 7.General Council of the Assemblies of God. Infertility. http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/relations_16_infertility.cfm. Accessed August 28, 2009.
- 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.Price J. Embryo Adoption. January 9, 2006; http://www.sbc.net/redirect.asp?url=http://erlc.com/article/embryo-adoption/&key=in+vitro&title=Embryo+Adoption&ndx=SBC,+IMB,+NAMB,+ANNUITY,+LIFEWAY,+WMU,+ERLC,+SEMINARIES. Accessed August 29, 2009.
- 10.Allen B. Southern baptist leader says in-vitro fertilization immoral. Ethicsdaily.com. January 16, 2008.Google Scholar
- 11.Connolly J. Top US. Evangelical leader: all involved with IVF responsible for “Vast Human Tragedy”. LifeSiteNews.com. January 11, 2008.Google Scholar
- 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
- 15.Ebrahim AFM. Biomedical issues: islamic perspective. Kuala Lumpur: A.S. Noordeen; 1993.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- 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.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.
- 25.Keown D. Buddhism & bioethics. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 1995.Google Scholar
- 26.Numrich PD. The problem with sex according to Buddhism. Dialog: Journal of Theology. 2009; 48(1):62–73.Google Scholar
- 27.Taniguchi S. Biomedical ethics from a Buddhist perspective. Pacific World New Series. 1987; 3(Fall):75–83.Google Scholar