Dignitatis Personae

(Summarized by the Catholic News Agency)

Third Part:

New Treatments which Involve the Manipulation of
the Embryo or the Human Genetic Patrimony

Attempts at hybridization

“Recently animal oocytes have been used for reprogramming the nuclei of human somatic cells… in order to extract embryonic stem cells from the resulting embryos without having to use human oocytes” (n. 33). 

“From the ethical standpoint, such procedures represent an offense against the dignity of human beings on account of the admixture of human and animal genetic elements capable of disrupting the specific identity of man” (n. 33).   

The use of human “biological material” of illicit origin 

For scientific research and for the production of vaccines or other products, cell lines are at times used which are the result of an illicit intervention against the life or physical integrity of a human being.  

  • Experimentation on human embryos “constitutes a crime against their dignity as human beings who have a right to the same respect owed to a child once born, just as to every person.  These forms of experimentation always constitute a grave moral disorder” (n. 34).
  • With regard to the use of “biological material” of illicit origin by researchers, which has been produced apart from their research center or which has been obtained commercially, the moral requirement “must be safeguarded that there be no complicity in deliberate abortion and that the risk of scandal be avoided.  In this regard, the criterion of independence as it has been formulated by some ethics committees is not sufficient.  According to this criterion, the use of ‘biological material’ of illicit origin would be ethically permissible provided there is a clear separation between those who, on the one hand, produce, freeze and cause the death of embryos and, on the other, the researchers involved in scientific experimentation”.  It needs to be remembered that the “duty to refuse to use such ‘biological material’ springs from the necessity to remove oneself, within the area of one’s own research, from a gravely unjust legal situation and to affirm with clarity the value of human life.  Therefore, the above-mentioned criterion of independence is necessary, but may be ethically insufficient” (n. 35).
  • “Of course, within this general picture there exist differing degrees of responsibility.  Grave reasons may be morally proportionate to justify the use of such ‘biological material’.  Thus, for example, danger to the health of children could permit parents to use a vaccine which was developed using cell lines of illicit origin, while keeping in mind that everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.  Moreover, in organizations where cell lines of illicit origin are being utilized, the responsibility of those who make the decision to use them is not the same as that of those who have no voice in such a decision” (n. 35).

To learn more about vaccines derived from aborted fetal tissue and circumstances under which their use is morally permissible, see:

Smith, Jason. "Vaccines: Their Biology and Morality." Saint Gabriel Respect Life. www.stgabrielcarlisle.org. July 2015.