A clear sign for life

On November 3 the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the ban on heterologous In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is not in breach of the right to respect for private and family life. The judgement was issued after two Austrian couples lodged an appeal to the Court against the Austrian ban. The Catholic Church also welcomed the judgement of the Grand Chamber, which overturns the decision issued by the First Section of the Court in 2010. Follows a summary of the opinions conveyed by dignitaries of the Austrian and Catholic Churches.The case. The court was petitioned in 2010 by two couples suffering from infertility, who wished to avail themselves of In Vitro Fertilization techniques. Austrian legislation provides for artificial insemination only with the gametes of the couple. Thus the couples presented their case to the European Court with the motivation that the Austrian regulation represented a discrimination, which is prohibited, and in breach of the right to respect for private and family life. In the judgement issued November 3rd the judges observed: “Austrian legislature has not completely ruled out artificial procreation as it allows the use of homologous techniques”. The Court acknowledges that “there is now a clear trend in the legislation of the Contracting States towards allowing gamete donation for the purpose of in vitro fertilisation,” but it “does not decisively narrow the margin of appreciation of the State”. The judges equally underlined the legitimacy of the legislature’s perplexities on the donation of gametes involving the intervention of third persons, “a controversial issue in Austrian society”, “raising complex questions of a social and ethical nature on which there was not yet a consensus”. Ultimately, states the judgement, “there is no prohibition under Austrian law on going abroad to seek treatment of infertility that uses artificial procreation techniques not allowed in Austria”.“A great relief”. “It is a great relief”, said Msgr. Klaus Küng, bishop of St. Pölten, head of Family and Bioethics questions at the Austrian Bishops’ Conference, in an interview released November 3rd by the Catholic News Agency Kathpress. “This decision respects the natural need of every person to know his/her biological parents”. The decision was welcomed also by the Austrian organization “Aktion Leben”: secretary general Martina Kronthaler told Kathpress that “the judgement confirms the concern that donations of ovocytes are not ‘harmless’ as they are often the result of the exploitation of women in situations of desperation”. Furthermore, he pointed out, “the psychological consequences on children with two biological mothers – the donor and the woman that gives birth to the child – are a theme on which no surveys have been made”. “Obviously”, Kronthaler underlined, the unfulfilled desire of maternity is a thorny question, for which it is necessary to provide support. But this support cannot take place to the detriment of other people”. Kronthaler recalled that “the donation of ovocytes has become a real and true industry with ramifications across all of Europe. The question of the child’s wellbeing or the exploitation of women in poor countries is underestimated in the debates on this issue”.A clear sign. “The judgement steps up the protection of the dignity of the human person”, said Msgr. Robert Zollitsch, President of the German Bishops’ Conference, in a statement released November 3rd. On behalf of the German bishops, Zollitsch said that the judges’ decision “is a clear sign against the use of human beings for material purposes. The serious danger linked to the donation of ovocytes – he warned -is to identify women as the object of commercial interests, exploiting their situation with the risk of considerable physical and psychological consequences. Donating ovocytes entails a health risk for women that must not be underestimated, thus the judges’ decision provides an important contribution to the protection of human health and to the life of the human person”. Moreover, Zollitsch said, the Court’s decision “gives priority to the child’s wellbeing”, preventing “the disintegration of family integrity” caused by the detachment of mother-child identity”. From a broader perspective, Zollitsch remarked, “with this ruling” and with the recent “negative decision of the European Court on the possibility of patenting embryo stem cells”, “are two important decisions taken at European level, which plainly reject the commercialization and instrumental use of human life”.