Stretching out over the 50 different American states, across the American population, 396,526 human em-bryos are frozen. And this in the US alone. These are frozen babies, fruits of in vitro fertilisation techniques that produce more human embryos than are actually needed. Many of these embryos are frozen in liquid nitrogen, placed in limbo for future use.

Is it a cluster of cells that is being frozen or a human being?

Scientific experts, including those who support abortion, agree that the life of an individual human being starts at conception. This stage is also known as ‘fertilisation’. Thus, embryo freezing, being the freezing of a fertilised egg, is the freezing of a human being.

The standard medical text, Human Embryology and Teratology, states that, “although human life is a continuous process, fertilisation is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed”.

In his book A Defence of Abortion, philosopher David Boonin declares that “the most straightforward relation between you and me on the one hand and every human foetus on the other is this: all are living members of the same species, Homo sapiens. A human foetus after all is simply a human being at a very early stage in his or her development”.

We all pass through different stages in our life – childhood, adolescence, adulthood and old age; the embryonic phase is the first stage, without which the other stages would never occur.

Another pro-choice philosopher, Peter Singer, writes in his book Practical Ethics:“There is no doubt that, from the first moments of its existence, an embryo conceived from human sperm and eggs is a human being”.

Paul Ford, an American writer on Elle.com, had his article on ‘Determining the fate of frozen embryos’ published on CNN, explaining how he and his wife went through the procedure of in vitro fertilisation.

This is not bioethics but eugenics – discrimination respecting human life

Four eggs were fertilised, two of which were implanted, and the other two embryos were bathed in liquid nitrogen and frozen. Ford held that the first option they considered for the frozen embryos was to do nothing, “just leave them on ice and make a decision later”, while paying the fee for storage. However, he then asked the doctor: “What happens if we don’t pay for the storage of the embryos?” “Would you destroy them?” The doctor remained silent.

“There’s a lot of guesswork in the experience of such fertility departments,” held Ford.

No one knows exactly how many embryos in the world are stored in liquid nitrogen.

Ford decided to ask the doctor about the option of destruction. The doctor shrugged and said: “They just thaw. You take them out of the freezer, throw them out with the medical waste. That’s that.”

This is a dilemma faced by couples who, while their desires have been satisfied, have to decide on the fate of the embryos that remain in suspended animation.

In the suggested changes to the Embryo Protection Act, since only two of the five embryos created will be implanted, the scientist will naturally begin to select the most healthy-looking embryos.

This involves the selecting of embryos and leaving the less healthy ones on ice. This is not bioethics but eugenics – discrimination respecting human life. Eugenics is not permissible under our law; in fact, it is listed as one of the prohibited practices under the Embryo Protection Act and it must remain so.

Even if the couple reclaims the frozen embryos, should they desire to have other children, it is foreseeable that one-third of these frozen embryos will not survive the process of thawing.

This is destruction of human life. These embryos do not die naturally. Their death is foreseen.

Some embryos survive the thawing. Yet, these may not necessarily be of good enough quality to be implanted, for the freezing itself may damage the cells of the embryos. These damaged embryos are discarded too.

Embryo freezing creates another problem with regard to questions of ownership. What happens if the couple separates? What if they cannot decide what to do with the frozen embryos?

While these ethical ramifications have nothing to do with partisan politics, it has all to do with the defence of human dignity.

A human embryo deserves the dignity and respect due to any human person, making embryo freezing unacceptable.

Sara Portelli is a member of Life Network.