After the typical theological and bioethical questions about in vitro fertilization (IVF) are vetted, there remains a three-dimensional understanding of responsibility that is not typically considered in Christian bioethics. This paper will explore responsibility to the spouses’ loving union, their bodies, and society in order to ascertain the morality of IVF. In a marriage partnership, the spouses’ primary responsibility is to each other. Although in matrimony physical union is essential to marriage, children are not. The second dimension of responsibility focuses (...) on the body—“the temple of God”—and on our responsibility to care for it. This concerns the woman, her husband, and even the newborn. Finally, the third understanding of responsibility leads us to address social concerns, with an emphasis on social dynamics, especially the cost of IVF procedures and how they siphon medical resources away from more urgent human needs in health care and within society. (shrink)

The recent California octuplets case raises a number of important issues that need to be addressed in the context of the increasingly widespread practice of in vitro fertilization. This paper explores some of those issues as looked at from the perspective of protestant theological ethics and public theology, examining the moral responsibilities of the various participants in the process, both before and after the octuplets’ birth, including the mother, her doctors, the health care bureaucracy, the wider society, and the media. (...) Each of these participants failed in significant respects to consider the ethical implications of the births in this complicated case. (shrink)

The “Phoenix Case” brought into public scrutiny a contemporary debate in Catholic moral theology over competing views on the relation of the object of the act to the physical structure of acts that arise from moral choices. A procedure that was described by hospital officials and their parent company as an indirect abortion was judged by the local ordinary, Bishop Thomas Olmsted, as a direct abortion. A debate ensued between Bishop Olmsted and Catholic Health Care West and their advisors. Eventually, (...) Bishop Olmsted excommunicated Sister Margaret Mary McBride for her role on the ethics committee approving the procedure and publicly announced his refusal to recognize the hospital as authentically Catholic. This author addresses the theological position of the hospital and addresses implications for other professionals in Catholic health care facing similar dilemmas. (shrink)