The work of Robert Edwards and Patrick Steptoe on in vitro fertilisation is something to be lauded and praised, not something to be critical of, writes PAUL O'DONOGHUE OKAY, I CONFESS. I like reading horror stories and eerie mysteries. Stephen King, Bram Stoker, Arthur Conan Doyle and so on.
I enjoy the atmospheres created with wonderful stark images of foggy cobblestoned London or the bleak Yorkshire Moors, especially reading on winter nights in bed with the rain pelting off the windows.
But I know it is fiction and the terrors are not real. Hence the capacity for enjoyment.
However, my reading over the past week or two has not been at all pleasant. The Case of the Pope: Vatican Accountability for Human Rights Abuses , written by the distinguished human rights lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson QC, is the first Penguin Special to be published since 1989. It is the stuff of real nightmares.
In general, I do strive to be reasonable and respectful and I tend to steer well clear of public comment on religious or spiritual matters.
However, the response by Msgr Ignacio Carrasco de Paula, head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, to the awarding of the Nobel prize for medicine to Prof Robert Edwards has provoked me to bend the latter rule.
Prof Edwards, along with Patrick Steptoe until his death in 1988, worked against huge odds to develop the technique of in vitro fertilisation (IVF). This technology, as it has evolved over the years, has helped countless couples realise the seemingly impossible dream of having a child.
It is estimated that four million children have been born thanks to IVF and that between two and three percent of all current births are as a consequence of this and related procedures.
The pain suffered by the 10 per cent of couples who are likely to experience significant fertility problems is horrendous. It was empathy and distress at their predicament that drove Edwards and Steptoe in their efforts to find an effective intervention. In the course of their work they faced opposition from many sides and appropriate worries were expressed concerning the many ethical challenges that arose from their research.
Msgr de Paula has stated: “I find the choice of Robert Edwards completely out of order.” He states that “Without Edwards there wouldn’t be a market for eggs, or freezers full of embryos waiting to be transferred in utero, or, more likely, be used for research or to die, abandoned and forgotten by all.”
I understand that the monsignor may find such a state of affairs abhorrent and I respect his right to express his views.
However, in light of the contents of Geoffrey Robertson’s book they ring very hollow indeed.
To pontificate, as Vatican officials regularly do, especially with regard to matters sexual, it is important to have demonstrated some consistency in the application of the standards preached and in the living of them. This is patently absent at senior levels within the walls of the Vatican and on a grand scale within the Catholic Church.
The continuing proscription on condom use is upheld by the church, even in the context of the dreadful Aids problem afflicting much of Africa, despite scientific evidence regarding its protective effects. This position is anathema to many, including me.
Geoffrey Robertson refers to “three stunning, shameful and incontrovertible facts about the governance of the Catholic church” in recent times.
First, tens of thousands of children have been sexually abused by the clergy with dreadful consequences.
Second, thousands of clergy, known to be guilty of grave crimes, have been harboured by the church, moved to different parishes and countries and protected from the rigours of civil law, being dealt with instead under the very different protocols of Canon Law.
Third, it has dealt with sex abusers in utter secrecy and has withheld evidence of their guilt from law-enforcement agencies in a range of countries.
It seems to me that the life and work of Robert Edwards exemplifies a caring, open, and considered attitude to the health and welfare of his patients and he has given life, love and hope to those touched by the fruits of his labour.
He is thoroughly deserving of his Nobel prize and the ethical concerns and energies of Msgr de Paula might be more profitably exercised much closer to home.
Paul O’Donoghue is a clinical psychologist and founder member of The Irish Skeptics Society.
SIC: IT/IE