Religious, Legal and Social Implications of the Use of Reproductive Material of the Dead: A Case Study
Whitny Braun, PhD., Assistant Professor of Ethics, Loma Linda University
Alex Dubov, PhDc., Assistant Professor, Loma Linda University
This paper presents a case study involving a formerly married couple’s religious debate over the genetic material of their deceased son. The couple in question were previously active members in the Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder-day Saints (LDS). Shortly after their only son’s sixteenth’s birthday they had received the devastating news that their son was diagnosed with leukemia. Assuming that treatments would cure their son but leave him sterile they collected sperm samples that their son would presumably use when he was older.
Unfortunately, their son passed away before his seventeenth birthday and within another year the husband and wife had divorced. She had become an Atheist and he had left the Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder-day Saints (LDS) in favor of a fundamentalist sect of Mormonism. Their son’s sperm samples were not considered during the divorce negotiations.
A decade passed. During this time the husband had remarried but suffered testicular cancer rendering him sterile. He could not have his own children and his only remaining option for promoting his own genetic line was to utilize his deceased son’s sperm. He had found a nineteen-year-old woman in the fundamentalist community he was a part of who was willing to be posthumously married to his deceased son and be inseminated with the sperm, thus bearing his grandchild.
The woman’s former husband approached her about ownership of the sperm. As they had divorced in California they had equal ownership over the genetic material. She was horrified by his proposed plan for the sperm and she wanted the specimen destroyed. He argued that as a Mormon their son would want his line continued for the sake of having his own family in heaven.
The woman refused to grant him use of the sperm. The man refused to give his permission to have the sperm destroyed. He wished to move forward and had retained legal counsel. The woman argued that her son, a believing member of the LDS church would not have believed in a posthumous marriage or in fathering a child after his own death, especially not with a young woman who was willing to enter into such an unorthodox arrangement. The man argued that his son would have followed him into the fundamentalist belief system and would have wanted it to ensure his eternal happiness.
In this presentation we will ask the following ethical questions: 1) What are the rights of the deceased son in this case and are there any religious guidelines that can be utilized to guide the decision-making process? 2) What do other faith traditions say with regard to the use of reproductive material following one of the biological parent’s deaths. 3) What are different faith traditions’ views on performing spiritual rituals for the deceased and can these standards be applied in a legal setting? 4) Should reproductive material be assigned the same legal status as property in a divorce? 5) Finally, what role should third-party decision making play in mediating this conflict?
Alex Dubov, PhDc., Assistant Professor, Loma Linda University
This paper presents a case study involving a formerly married couple’s religious debate over the genetic material of their deceased son. The couple in question were previously active members in the Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder-day Saints (LDS). Shortly after their only son’s sixteenth’s birthday they had received the devastating news that their son was diagnosed with leukemia. Assuming that treatments would cure their son but leave him sterile they collected sperm samples that their son would presumably use when he was older.
Unfortunately, their son passed away before his seventeenth birthday and within another year the husband and wife had divorced. She had become an Atheist and he had left the Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder-day Saints (LDS) in favor of a fundamentalist sect of Mormonism. Their son’s sperm samples were not considered during the divorce negotiations.
A decade passed. During this time the husband had remarried but suffered testicular cancer rendering him sterile. He could not have his own children and his only remaining option for promoting his own genetic line was to utilize his deceased son’s sperm. He had found a nineteen-year-old woman in the fundamentalist community he was a part of who was willing to be posthumously married to his deceased son and be inseminated with the sperm, thus bearing his grandchild.
The woman’s former husband approached her about ownership of the sperm. As they had divorced in California they had equal ownership over the genetic material. She was horrified by his proposed plan for the sperm and she wanted the specimen destroyed. He argued that as a Mormon their son would want his line continued for the sake of having his own family in heaven.
The woman refused to grant him use of the sperm. The man refused to give his permission to have the sperm destroyed. He wished to move forward and had retained legal counsel. The woman argued that her son, a believing member of the LDS church would not have believed in a posthumous marriage or in fathering a child after his own death, especially not with a young woman who was willing to enter into such an unorthodox arrangement. The man argued that his son would have followed him into the fundamentalist belief system and would have wanted it to ensure his eternal happiness.
In this presentation we will ask the following ethical questions: 1) What are the rights of the deceased son in this case and are there any religious guidelines that can be utilized to guide the decision-making process? 2) What do other faith traditions say with regard to the use of reproductive material following one of the biological parent’s deaths. 3) What are different faith traditions’ views on performing spiritual rituals for the deceased and can these standards be applied in a legal setting? 4) Should reproductive material be assigned the same legal status as property in a divorce? 5) Finally, what role should third-party decision making play in mediating this conflict?