At a campaign rally in Michigan on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announced a new policy proposal to have the government pay for fertilization services. in vitro (FIV).
“Under the Trump administration, your government will pay or your insurance company will be obligated to pay all costs associated with IVF treatment,” he announced.
Receive the main news from ACI Prensa by WhatsApp and Telegram
It is increasingly difficult to see Catholic news on social media. Subscribe to our free channels today:
Trump claimed that the reason for this policy was “because we want more babies.”
“We are in favor of the family; “No one has said that before, but IVF treatments are expensive, it is very difficult for many people to do it and get it, but I have been in favor of IVF from the beginning.”
Although Trump has characterized his support for IVF as pro-child and pro-family, the announcement has drawn criticism from numerous pro-life Catholics.
So what is IVF and can Catholics support government spending on these treatments?
What is IVF?
fertilization in vitro It is a medical procedure that unites sperm and eggs in a laboratory setting to conceive a child outside of sexual intercourse. The live embryo is then implanted into the uterus to continue developing until birth.
According to the Mayo ClinicIVF is typically used as an “infertility treatment” that “can also be used to prevent the transmission of genetic problems to children.”
Is IVF pro-life?
During the IVF process, multiple human embryos are created and then evaluated in a “classification” process that determines its cellular “quality.”
Nearly half of human embryos created through IVF are “discarded” during the process, according to the Center for Genetics and Society. This has led to millions of human embryos being discarded, something that in the eyes of the Catholic Church amounts to the murder of millions of innocent lives.
Furthermore, the use of IVF has resulted in a surplus of approximately 1 million human embryos that are kept frozen in laboratories across the United States, where they are often stored indefinitely or destroyed in the embryonic scientific research.
While the Church encourages certain fertility treatments for couples struggling to have children, the use of IVF is contrary to Catholic teachings.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church in its numeral 2377 affirms that IVF is “morally reprehensible” because it separates the marital act from procreation and establishes “a domination of technique” over human life.
What do Catholics say?
Michael Knowles, a prominent political and Catholic podcaster, reacted to Trump’s announcement by questioning why the former president would “impose a radical perspective that the largest religious groups in the country oppose.”
“The two largest religious groups in the United States, Catholics and Southern Baptists, formally oppose IVF,” Knowles said. in a post by X. “Many other Americans also reject it as immoral. “It seems reckless for a political campaign to mandate that so many potential voters support something they consider gravely evil.”
Lila Rose, Catholic and president of the pro-life group Live Action, and in recent weeks a open criticism of some of Trump’s more permissive statements on abortion, responded to the ad by comparing it to the contraceptive mandate under the Obama administration.
“Trump just announced that his administration will pay for IVF with tax dollars or force all insurance companies to cover it,” said at X. “Only 7% of embryos created through IVF will result in a live birth; the remaining 93% freeze indefinitely, suffer pregnancy loss or have an abortion. More than 1 million human embryos are already frozen from these IVF procedures. How is this morally different from Obama’s contraceptive mandate?”
Michael New, a political economy professor specializing in social policy issues at the Catholic University of America, told EWTN News’ CNA that he believes IVF “undermines a culture of life” and that he is “especially disappointed with the fact that President Trump has spoken out in favor of using taxpayer money for IVF treatments.”
“As someone who believes in the teachings of the Catholic Church on IVF, I realize that many Americans do not share my perspective,” he admitted. “However, I would simply like the government to stay out of IVF. Don’t spend taxpayer money on IVF. And the rights of conscience of health professionals who do not wish to participate in IVF treatments are respected.”
While acknowledging that Trump “has certainly disappointed pro-lifers in this election cycle,” he said “there are still good reasons to think that President Trump would be better on sanctity of life issues than Kamala Harris.”
“(Trump’s) judicial nominees would certainly be better than the judges nominated by Kamala Harris,” New explained. “His appointees to the executive branch would be more receptive to pro-life concerns. This is important considering that they would like to see the FDA impose some limits on the shipment of chemical abortion drugs. Finally, unlike President Biden, President Trump would also not use the Department of Justice as a weapon to prosecute pro-lifers who engage in acts of civil disobedience.”
That said, New said that “if pro-life voters would prefer to support a third-party candidate who is stronger on sanctity of life issues, they would be justified in doing so.”
Translated and adapted by the ACI Prensa team. Originally published in CNA.
Peter Pinedo
Peter Pinedo is a Washington DC correspondent for CNA. A graduate of Franciscan University, Peter previously worked for Texas Right to Life. He is a first lieutenant in the United States Army Reserve.