In 1987, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued Donum Vitae (Instruction on Respect for Human Life), where the Church officially forbade the use of in vitro fertilization (IVF), stating: “The child has the right to be conceived, carried in the womb, brought into the world and brought up within marriage. The good of society requires that children come into the world within a family and that the family be based on marriage, the only setting worthy of truly responsible procreation.”
Many Catholics, including some pro-life advocates, fail to realize that Church teaching forbids the practice of IVF as a means of creating life, even for infertile couples. In vitro requires the removal of eggs from a woman and subsequent fertilization with sperm in a laboratory setting.
The message of Donum Vitae and subsequent Church writings eventually convinced Dr. Anthony Caruso, a Chicago-based fertility doctor who attended Loyola Medical School, to abandon his practice of IVF and embrace the Church’s teaching. Register correspondent Christopher White spoke with Caruso about his conversion as well as his current work to educate all Catholics on what it means to build a true culture of life.
What was your upbringing like? Were you raised in a Catholic family?
I was born in Maine and moved with my family to Boston when I was 2 weeks old. My upbringing was within a good Irish-Italian Catholic family. I remember frequently going to Mass as a child, sometimes on my own during the summers. In the fifth grade, I was invited to join the Boston Archdiocesan Choir School at St. Paul’s Church in Cambridge. We were trained in sacred music and Gregorian chant and sang all over New England, but our main church was St. Paul’s. There, we assisted with high Mass every week (the Mass was in English, but there was English and Latin polyphony, and chant was a frequent part as well). So, I guess, a big part of my early formation was through sacred music.
When I moved to high school, the Catholic teaching was a little more modern and based greatly on social-justice issues (violence in America, the nuclear freeze, etc.). And even in my Catholic college we were encouraged to deconstruct our religious beliefs and consider that man created God, using Ludwig Feuerbach, Friedrich Nietzsche and “liberation theology” authors.
While liturgical music continued to draw me to church, I slowly started to get too busy — and church began to fall a little to the wayside in medical school. I fell in love and married a woman who, at the time, was the youngest pastoral associate in the Chicago Archdiocese. While I would never say that we fell completely away from the Church, I can’t say that we were fully active participants in the sacraments.
What inspired you to seek a career in reproductive medicine?
This story begins with high school. The world’s first IVF baby was delivered in 1978 (in the U.K.) just after my freshman year of high school. I was looking for a job and responded to an ad from one of the laboratories at the Massachusetts General Hospital for a lab assistant. It turned out to be the lab of William Crowley, one of the early American pioneers in IVF. While I was not well received, those two events probably planted the seeds for my interest.
However, the real inspiration was when I was a medical resident. As a part of the training, we were sent to Rush Medical Center [in Chicago] for our rotation in reproductive endocrinology. The world that I entered was amazing to me. The patients were so nice, and the nurses and people so caring, that I was drawn to the practice. Then, one of the first-year fellows quit abruptly, and I was asked to take on more of the functions that he would have done. It was like a dream come true, and when I returned from training,, I decided that was the direction that I would turn for my career.
When was the first time you ever encountered the Church's teaching against assisted reproductive technologies?
I think that there was always a time that I was sensitive to restrictions in the Church’s teaching, but was always of the opinion that the ends justified the means. About 10 years ago, though, I was interviewed by the Chicago Tribune and asked what I thought about same-sex couples undergoing therapy. This was a long time before the debate was as popular as it is today, and I responded that the people that he was referring to were just like everybody else, God’s children. At that time, I was heavily involved in my parish. I was on the school board and the pastoral council. After the article was published, I was called into the office of the pastor, Father James Dvorscak, and asked about the article and my response. At the end of that discussion, I was asked to step down from the pastoral council.
What was your initial response?
I wish that I could say that I was indignant or angry, but not really. I, again, thought that the ends (the children) were worth the means and that most people agreed with me.
Slowly, however, you begin to have a conversion and eventually embraced Church teaching against IVF and other assisted reproductive technologies. What was that process like?
The experience I just related turned out to be the first step in God’s plan for me. My wife began teaching in the theology department at a Catholic high school close to my home. One of her colleagues was a devout Catholic, and we used to have very pointed discussions about Donum Vitae and its implications on the Church. In 2000, I even went to the conference that celebrated the 90th birthday of the “Father of American IVF,” Howard Jones. However, in 2007, I believe, my wife went on a summer European trip with some of the high-school students. One of the stops was Rome. She came back from there inspired, and we started to go to church more.
In the fall of 2007, my mother-in law died, and in the spring of 2008, my father-in-law died suddenly, which moved us toward a more authentic view of our faith. In December of 2008, Dignitas Personae was published, and I read about it in the National Catholic Register. I was simply amazed at [former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] Cardinal [William] Levada’s insights and how the presentation of the Church teaching was very clear. Unbeknownst to me, my wife had written to both [Chicago Archbishop] Cardinal [Francis] George and to [now Seattle Archbishop] Bishop [J. Peter] Sartain asking for their help in finding an alternative for me. Soon thereafter, I had an interview to be the chief of reproductive medicine at Loyola University.
While the idea of the practice was just taking shape then, the chair of the department was very interested. Though the position was offered to someone else, we stayed in touch and were working towards creating a position that would bring the idea to life. Then he was removed from his position and that ended. I knew that something had to be done and started working more closely with the archdiocesan offices. I befriended the director of the Respect Life Office and was offered help from the cardinal’s liaison for health, Father William Grogan. He introduced me to the administrations of two hospital systems, where the idea was presented.
The response was that the idea was good, but it didn’t seem viable at the time. I then met a doctor, Dr. Robert Lawler, at the introduction of a local priest, who introduced me to the CEO of another Catholic hospital who was interested, but we could not make all of the pieces fit.
I wish I could say that the end was sudden and glorious, but I was simply let go by my last job mostly due to economic issues. However, I was in line to take over the presidency of the local association of fertility providers and resigned at my first meeting. This strained the relationship between me and some very good friends in the field.
Since leaving your former practice, what have you done?
Since I could not find an opportunity to start the [pro-life fertility] center, I was able to find a position as an obstetrical hospitalist at another Catholic hospital in the region [Alexian Brothers]. I monitor the patients in labor, evaluate antepartum tests and patients and play a role in the education of the medical students that rotate through. In February of 2012, however, the HHS mandate was released, and new opportunities arose.
First, I was asked to help in opposing the creation of a fertility center within a couple of blocks of a Catholic church in one of the Western suburbs of Chicago (Naperville). Then I was asked to speak at the first of the Stand Up for Religious Freedom rallies in Chicago [which the Register covered]. I was involved in an amicus brief that was involved with a Supreme Court case (Astrue v. Capato) that dealt with Social Security benefits for posthumously conceived children [based on a case where a mother conceived twins using the frozen sperm of her deceased husband. After their birth, the mother attempted to claim survivor benefits for the children].
I have been speaking about IVF and contraceptive issues around the Chicago area — and specifically on how they feed into the development of a culture that commodifies life. I also write for a blog at ChicagoInfertility.com. Soon, I will be traveling to Costa Rica to help the government in their struggle against the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
I still am hoping and praying that we will soon be able to establish the St. Anne Center for Reproductive Health. This would be a center in Chicago that would offer infertility treatment within the framework of Catholic values. Mostly, though, I am trying to build my interior life in order to better live within the current culture and to see more clearly what God’s will is for me. I know, at least, that all that has been accomplished has only been through the grace of the Holy Spirit.
Do you think that most lay Catholics know or understand why the Church opposes IVF? Don’t most Catholics just consider such technologies as compassionate and, for some, even pro-life?
Frankly, I am not sure that most lay Catholics even realize that the Church finds IVF illicit. The Catholic Catechism is not a primary text of most religion classes. In fact, most people I know did not realize that contraception was wrong either. With the surveys that show the low attendance at Mass, and the relatively low number that believe in the Real Presence or in confession, it is not too surprising.
I do believe that many people see IVF the same way I did until my reversion. Whenever advanced reproductive technologies are discussed, the primary subjects are the children and the couple or a woman’s “right” to have a child. They see it from the perspective of the outcome only. They do not see the process as a complete breakdown of the marital bond.
I frequently remind people that the original IVF clinic in America, the Jones Institute, was protested by the same pro-life groups that protested the abortion clinics. After Elizabeth Carr was born [in 1981] — and shown on TV with her tufts of hair and fully formed fingers and toes — the conversation changed overnight. Sometimes the response to my story is that people think that I see something amiss in the children created through IVF. This is where the circular argument starts. It appears difficult for some to see that the children are indeed children of God but the process that brought them into the world is where the problem lies.
Would you say that some doctors see other people’s infertility as a business and are using it as an opportunity to make money?
As someone who was in the field for 15 years, I can confidently say that while the infertility industry is a business, like all health care is, I have rarely met or observed anyone whose primary purpose was to make money. The vast majority of specialists in the field mean well and want the couples to succeed. They look at the successful pregnancy outcomes as the primary key.
It is the subject that is discussed, compared and studied most often. In fact, when there are proposals made that look to be primarily profit-minded, they are largely rejected by most specialists, at least initially.
What would you say to a couple who are struggling with infertility and want desperately to conceive, but also want to maintain faithfulness to Church teaching?
The first thing that I would tell them is that they need to trust in God and his plan. If the couple has tried to conceive for at least a year, they should have a complete evaluation, seeking to find the basis for the couple’s infertility. Once found, a medical or surgical plan should be carried out.
Medical therapies that maximize the ovulation window or can potentially improve sperm counts can be used. If these therapies fail, then they should be good candidates for adoption or foster care, or to turn towards other directions that God may lead them.
Christopher White writes from New York.
Matthew Warner: Ask Fr. Barron: What to say to Catholics who struggle with Church teaching?
Jennifer Fulwiler: The Shocking Ethics Behind the Contraceptive Choice Project
Comments
Post a Comment
If he has not already, PLEASE encourage Dr. Caruso to contact Dr. Thomas Hilgers at the Pope Paul VI Institute in Omaha. Perhaps he is already aware of NaProTechnology and FertiltyCare Centers but if not he would be most interested to learn about this form of NFP.
The primary problem the Roman Catholic Church has with InVetroFertilization (IVF) is that out of necessity it must begin with masturbation. (How else can semen be extracted?) But according to St. Paul ‘every genital act must be within the framework of marriage’ and that ‘masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act’ because ‘the deliberate use of the sexual faculty outside moral conjugal relations essentially contradicts the finality of the faculty’. (How could St. Paul possibly understand modern medical techniques today in light of his own tortured views on human sexuality?)The sexual ignorance of the church’s magisterium deep¬ened when Karol Wojtyla became Pope John Paul II in 1979; he had helped to compose Humanae Vitae and Persona Humana and took such a hard line on sexuality that his follow-up encyclical, The Splendour of Truth (1988), put contraception alongside geno¬cide as amongst the acts that are ‘intrinsically evil’. He forbade further discussion of contraception and instructed his nuncios to spy on up-and-coming clerics and to recommend for promotion to bishop only those who unquestioningly supported the pro¬hibition.16 This led to appointments of men who in many cases lacked street wisdom and insight into human sexual behaviour, and who were to prove astonishingly naive in accepting the excuses of paedophile priests and in believing that they might be cured by prayer and penitence or by counseling.
InVetroFertilization has been a blessing for many God fearing and Roman Catholic infertile couples, who would otherwise have remained childless. Science is not in competition with religion but proclaims the glory of God especially in the world of medicine. For God it is not the act but the intent (our heart behind our actions and thoughts. It is by God’s grace that we gradually dexperience conversion - it has little to do changing (repentance) our falsely adopted belief systems.
@Trebert- You are so far off the mark. If you would do research the church used to instantly defrock any priest who abused a child. Popular scientific psychiatrict views were that these men could be cured. Eventually the church gave into popular science and when they did is when popular science started to change thier tune. Secondly, Blessed JP2 had incredible insight into the relationship between a man and woman but by what you have written I can tell you have not read his Love & Responsibility or Theology of the Body. Thirdly, there is excellent medical help for infertile couples that is more effective than IVF and it doesn’t go against church teaching. Just because a couple wants a child doesn’t mean that they have to have a child. That is viewing the child as an object and not a person when you force the issue with IVF. There is also evidence that children born from IVF have a higher rate of genetic defects, long term health issues and other problems. The Mother’s prenancy with IVF generally has more complications and premature deliveries.
Trebert,
It’s a free country & you are entitled to your opinions, but it’s a bit odd to use a Catholic website to post a personal religious treatise containing not a whiff of Catholic teaching on IVF.
Just my thoughts.
Maggie,
Unless you educate readers on how ‘popular science’ changed their tune about what the Church teaches they may prefer my position. Even if there are other and better ways then IVF it will still require the transference of human semen. And therein lies the problem, doesn’t it?
As for the state of sexual abuse scandal: some Catholics may not want to hear about that issue anymore (I am a convert) but it is a problem that affects all of us (Catholic or otherwise), continues to this very day and will continue until our Church leadership accepts full responsibility for the endemic and systemic causes behind the scandal. For more on this http://whenreligionfails.blogspot.ca/2012/08/pope-benedict-is-deeply-hurt.html
or
For a more detailed approach to both issues read Geoffrey Robertson, Q.C. ‘The Case of the Pope – Vatican Accountability for Human Rights Abuse. Its available online through Amazon for less than ten bucks. I will guarantee you and a lot of other Catholics they won’t like it. But it will hopefully bring God’s healing to a very frail and fractured institution.
The teaching against IVF has nothing to do with masturbation (although it tends to come with the package)—even if there was a means to do IVF without masturbation, it would still be sinful because as the CCC puts it:
2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that “entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children.” “Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses’ union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person.”
The article is fine for what it is: A conversion story and a reiteration of the illicit nature of IVF.
What this article does not address is the simple technical fact that more and more data show that IVF children have an array of negative medical issues in their lifetime; the moral issue is not only in the nature of their creation, but in their physical well-being as well.
Since when did it become morally unacceptable for an infertile couple to bring a living and breathing soul into this world, which is ultimately created by God, by means of IVF? Is this infant somehow less, are the loving parents also somehow less. How can anyone, except God, know that this is not the fruit of a loving and God centered conjugal act? This form of procreation wasn’t even known to Saints Paul and Augustine. Our Church remains some 400 to almost 2000 years behind the times and continues to resist change except to go backwards. God works in the present, not in the past and not in the future. God meets us where we are not where others would have us be. The use of fear to dismiss IVF is the sign of an absence of love and a trust in God. Accusing innocent people of their sins is called judgment – and Jesus forbade it.
This article avoids a pure and simple clinical truth behind an outdated claim by our Church that masturbation remains a sin. It is well known that human sexuality (our gift from God) when suppressed can lead to abhorrent sexual behaviour – as we are now witnessing in the Church and elsewhere.
Most interesting article and discussion. At some point we have to believe as Catholics that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit “and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” etc. The Church is the only major entity that has not changed with the culture on the issues of life like contraception, IVF etc. Many even our own keep calling for the Church to change to keep in sync with the culture, society, the times. Seems to me this reasoning has been disastrous for the other major churches that have changed since the Lambeth Council in the 1930’s. It’s a free country thank God, and people like Trebert have the right to express their disagreements with the Church and even serve a purpose to keep us constantly reviewing and understanding our position. As for me I am most content to embrace the Church’s teachings and I am confident it is the right position especially after becoming very familiar and comfortable with the teachings of JPII and others. The Church’s position is “as it was in the beginning”.
Trebart— i am afraid you are mistaken when you say “The primary problem the Roman Catholic Church has with InVetroFertilization (IVF) is that out of necessity it must begin with masturbation. (How else can semen be extracted?)” The truth is that semen can be extracted by other means (aspiration, to be precise). The problem the Roman Catholic Church has with In Vitro Fertilization is that it takes place outside of the marital act and involves a third party. And again, with all respect, you are mistaken when you say “For God it is not the act but the intent (our heart behind our actions and thoughts.” A moral judgment is made on the action, the intent, and the result—not simply the intent. Thus, the age old example of why it is immoral to blow up an abortion clinic to put an end to abortion. The intent (ending abortion) is a good one. The action (blowing up the clinic) is wrong. God bless you.
The Holy Spirit is within all of creation and the entire ever expanding universe. God does not play favorites therefore his Spirit is available to all people regardless of their faith and/or (non)religions. However, God gave us free will, so we can refuse to listen to his love for us. Fortunately for us God continues to love us unconditionally. The deeper question then is how can we learn to trust in our heart (the place where God resides)? How does my religion help us to discover that we are all unique individuals (not special) brought here to earth to share our gifts and talents, so we may become as One? Religion fails whenever it sees itself as the necessary intermediate to our Creator.
What barb said. It is the great error of our age that takes a good thing (love), and fuses it moral relativism. But that is not love at all. Not every married couple can have their own children. There are plenty of legitimate ways that they may try such as fertility treatments and such. But there is a limit—and that is that you can’t take the intimate act, separate it in clinic and hand it over to doctors. The is no new knowledge about sexuality that in any way demonstrates that the Catholic Church is out of touch any more than the development of daisy-cutter bombs demonstrates that Church is out-of-date about teaching not killing innocent people with them.
[Other than by] masturbation [h]ow else can semen be extracted?
—Trebert (9:11 AM)
With a needle and syringe. Whatever the technical means of obtaining sperm, if the intended use is an IVF procedure or other assisted reproductive technique (such as but not limited to IUI, GIFT, and artificial insemination) it is impermissible according to Church teaching.
Barb,
According to the Advanced Fertility Center of Chicago - IVF Specialist Clinic Gurnee & Crystal Lake, Illinois the IVF Egg Retrieval Procedure known as In vitro fertilization requires egg aspiration for fertility treatment.
In order to get sufficient eggs for the in vitro fertilization process, the woman is stimulated with injected medications using one of several IVF medication stimulation protocols to develop multiple follicles and eggs. The injections are usually done by the woman, or by her partner. Now where do you suppose the semen came from and how?
It is so apparent that we so desperately need Catechesis for Catholics in every stage of life. It should not stop at Confirmation! Thank GOD the Church does not change with the culture!
Barb,
According to the Advanced Fertility Center of Chicago - IVF Specialist Clinic Gurnee & Crystal Lake, Illinois the IVF Egg Retrieval Procedure calls for an In vitro fertilization egg aspiration for fertility treatment.
In order to get sufficient eggs for the in vitro fertilization process, the woman is stimulated with injected medications using one of several IVF medication stimulation protocols to develop multiple follicles and eggs. The injections are usually done by the woman, or by her partner. Now where do you suppose the semen came from and how?
IVF treatments also require that the egg donor produce many eggs in a short period of time. This process is very hard on the woman’s body. It is strange that as everyone becomes more sensitive to organic foods and honoring natural farming we are willing to do something so unnatural to the female body.
Often poor women are motivated to undergo this treatment in order to sell their eggs.
The wealthy take advantage of the poor.
We should recommend NaPro Technology through the Pope Paul Vi Institute in Omana Nebraska for fertility needs
Trebart,
Your last comment directed toward me shows your incredible ignorance not only of the wisdom of the Church and Her teachings but also of the science involved in infertility treatments. A woman can undergo ovarian stimulation and then she and her husband can engage in the marital embrace to achieve pregnancy without violating Churvh teaching. It might be time for you to stop posting, Trebart. God bless you.
Scripture tells us that Jesus came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. What do we suppose he meant by that – what did he fulfill it with? The answer is staring us in the face - we have eyes and cannot see. Jesus fulfilled the law with LOVE! That’s why he so often scolded the religious leaders of his time about their dogmatic interpretation of the law. They thought that by fulfilling the law meant ‘to take it to the letter not the heart’.
Where is your heart when it comes to IVH between a loving and married couple. Does it draw you to the law? Are we interpreting religious teachings according to the letter or the heart?
When we use our hearts we learn to drop the need to judge (especially the poor). And again did Jesus not warn us to judge others?
Love without Truth is not love at all. IVF is an offense against chastity not because of Catholic law, but because it is an objective violation of God’s order. “Don’t judge others” does not mean “Pretend nobody knows the truth.”
My comments reflect MY experience of God. I have neither asked or insisted that you accept them as truth or as a means that would invalidate your understanding of your religion. I have been wrong on many an occasion.
The best way to respond pro actively, rather then re actively, to conflict is:
a) speak the Creator and listen to his response, and
b) respond with a counter point of view,and respecting the author. He/she is a person just like you.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.