I had been somewhat ambivalent on ART (assisted reproductive technology) which includes IVF (invitro fertilization) . . . until I did a deep dive into the ethics. Carter Snead deals at length with ART in his book What It Means To Be Human. At this point, I have some strong reservations on the ethical implications of ART. Ericka Andersen has an opinion piece here entitled “The Missing Fine Print On IFV.” “IVF answered prayers—but it also ushered in a host of ethical crises we must now confront.”

“in today’s landscape of legal abortion and so-called “gender-affirming” care, patients are often denied the very information this principle requires. The long-term consequences of abortion on women’s mental and physical health, or the irreversible repercussions of hormones and surgery, are rarely emphasized.

When it comes to in-vitro fertilization (IVF), the pattern is the same. Clinics often gloss over the fact that the process can produce far more embryos than a family will ever use—treating it as a technical detail instead of the moral crisis it is.“

Ericka drives a stake in the vampire’s heart with this truth: “IVF creates human lives only to leave them frozen, unused, or destroyed. But truth isn’t good for business.” She points to a paper released by Americans United For Life on informed consent in ART practices.

Yes, an embryo is human life. Robert George, the noted Princeton legal scholar and philosopher, forcefully argues that life begins at conception.

The largely unregulated IVF industry raises profound moral and ethical questions. Ericka pulls the curtain back with this truth – “What many parents don’t realize is that doctors literally grade embryos, discarding the “weak” and implanting only the “best.” This isn’t compassion. It’s eugenics masked as innovation. Babies hand-selected, or your money back.”