By Peter Pinedo
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Aug 30, 2024 / 17:16 pm
At a campaign rally in Michigan on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announced a new policy proposal that the government pay for in vitro fertilization (IVF) services.
“Under the Trump administration your government will pay for or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for all costs associated with IVF treatment,” Trump announced.
Trump claimed that the reason for this policy was “because we want more babies.”
“We’re pro-family; nobody’s ever said that before, but the IVF treatments are expensive, it’s very hard for many people to do it and to get it, but I’ve been in favor of IVF right from the beginning.”
Though Trump has cast 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?
IVF is a medical procedure that fuses sperm and egg in a lab environment to conceive a child outside of the sexual act. The live embryo is then later implanted into a uterus to continue developing until birth.
According to the Mayo Clinic, IVF is typically used as a “treatment for infertility” that “also can be used to prevent passing on genetic problems to a child.”
More in US
Is IVF pro-life?
During the IVF process, multiple human embryos are made and then evaluated in a “grading” process that determines their cellular “quality.”
Almost half of the 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 Church’s eyes amounts to the killing of millions of innocent lives.
Additionally, the use of IVF has resulted in a surplus of an estimated 1 million human embryos being kept frozen in laboratories across the country, where they are often stored indefinitely or destroyed in 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 No. 2377 states that IVF is “morally unacceptable” because it separates the marriage act from procreation and establishes “the domination of technology” over human life.
What are Catholics saying?
(Story continues below)
Michael Knowles, a prominent political podcaster and Catholic, reacted to Trump’s announcement by questioning why Trump would “mandate a radical perspective opposed by the largest religious groups in the country.”
“The two largest religious groups in the U.S., Catholics and Southern Baptists, both formally oppose IVF,” Knowles said in an X post. “Many other Americans also reject it as immoral. It seems ill-advised for a political campaign to mandate that so many likely voters support something they consider gravely evil.”
Lila Rose, president of the national pro-life group Live Action, a Catholic, and in recent weeks a vocal critic of some of Trump’s more permissive abortion statements, responded to the announcement by comparing it to the contraceptive mandate under the Obama administration.
“Trump just announced his admin would either pay for IVF with tax dollars or force all insurance companies cover it,” she said on X. “Only 7% of embryos created via IVF will result in a live birth; the remaining 93% are frozen indefinitely, miscarried, or aborted. Over 1 million human embryos are already frozen from these IVF procedures. How is this morally different than the contraceptive mandate under Obama?”
Michael New, a political economy professor specializing in social policy issues at The Catholic University of America, told CNA that he believes IVF “undermines a culture of life” and that he is “especially disappointed with the fact that President Trump has come out in favor of using taxpayer dollars for IVF treatments.”
“As someone who believes in Catholic Church teachings on IVF, I realize that many Americans do not share my perspective,” he granted. “However, I would simply like the government to stay out of IVF. No taxpayer dollars for IVF. And respect conscience rights of health care professionals who do not wish to participate in IVF treatments.”
Though he acknowledged that Trump “has certainly disappointed pro-lifers this election cycle,” he said that “there are still good reasons to think 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 executive branch appointees would be more receptive to the concerns of pro-lifers. This is important considering that pro-lifers would like the FDA to put some limits on the shipment of chemical abortion drugs. Finally, unlike President Biden, President Trump would also not weaponize the Department of Justice to prosecute pro-lifers who engage in civil disobedience.”
That being 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.”
