From Dr L. Said MD

Your correspondent Juan Ameen quotes Prof. Serracino Inglott as saying that “it is wrong to kill an embryo, but the obligation to keep an embryo alive is not absolute” (TMIS, 27 March).

Would one be wrong, if one interprets this statement as “it is wrong to murder (kill) an embryo but the obligation to avoid murder/manslaughter of an embryo (keep an embryo alive) is not absolute”?

An embryo has no power over the will to self-determination and/or self-expression. An embryo cannot say that it does not wish to be sacrificed for experiments and an embryo cannot say that it wishes to live longer.

Who would have legal responsibility for the embryo/s, which would be left to die?

When an embryo is left to die, it is licit to assume a parameter of premeditation, even when one wishes to exclude the parameter of malice, which would bring murder into the equation.

When an embryo is left to die, one is therefore confronted with premeditated death.

The ultimate question for a democratic society would be whether to legalise premeditated death. As long as premeditated death is not legalised, it is unlawful. Unlawful, premeditated death would fulfil the definition of manslaughter.

So would arise the question whether manslaughter of an embryo would constitute a case of medical negligence, as would be the case, if other patients would be wilfully left to die. Wilful medical negligence (the intent “to let die” being anchored a priori therein) would correspond to a criminal act, unless of course legally sanctioned as in the now well-known case of Terri Schiavo.

It was not possible to understand exactly, from the report, how “some of the (embryo) cells will be kept alive” through stem cell research, thus conveniently implying that the respective embryo has neither been killed nor left to die.

Prof. Serracino Inglott is moreover quoted as saying that the Curia does not consider the use of in vitro fertilisation to be morally wrong but the Curia is against it “because many fertilised embryos have to be used”.

What kind of entity is a “fertilised embryo”?

Prof. Serracino Inglott should decide whether he wishes to continue introducing subtle phrases and subtle concepts, which might be welcomed as legislative help by any parties that have vested economic interests in IVF and stem cell research.

Leo Said

Kleve

GERMANY