Resolution on Issues pertaining to Developments in Biomedicine and their Ethical Evaluation (Original: German)

Following the discussion of the Cultural-Political Working Group of the Central Committee of German Catholics on the question of “Biomedical Progress as a Challenge to the Christian Perception of Humanity” and the German Bishops’ Conference’s Pastoral on “Man: his own Creator?”, the General Assembly of the Central Committee of German Catholics passed the following resolution:

1. Genetic engineering, bio-medicine and neurobiology will bring about fundamental changes in our lives and will present a challenge to our religious, cultural and humanitarian attitudes. As Christians we must face up to this challenge. In order to shape a humane future we have to participate in this dialogue at all levels, social, cultural and political and ensure that science and humanities are able to co-operate with one another. This will necessitate taking part in a discourse that requires reasons to be given for the positions taken on the matter at hand. It is not possible to take a neutral stance in these questions.

The Central Committee of German Catholics acknowledges the right to free scientific research as defined by the law and sees medical research which aims to cure diseases as necessary. At the same time the Central Committee of German Catholics would like to re-emphasise the dignity of every human being which is central to the Christian concept of man and is also the basis for our constitution. The dignity of man puts limits on the freedom of scientific research with the aim of avoiding inhuman results.

2. Human life begins when the ovum and seed merge to create a fertilised egg with a double set of chromosomes. This moment of fusion does not mark the beginning of a development of which the end result is a human being, the human being is already in existence at this point. Every attempt to create a different starting point for human life and therefore for its protection is arbitrary. This is also the principle embodied in the prevailing law on embryonic protection, and rulings of the Federal Constitutional Court in this area have confirmed this principle.

The Central Committee of German Catholics is in favour of developing a comprehensive law to cover medical reproduction which takes the recent bio-medical developments into account and which does not fall below the level of protection allowed for by the current law on embryo pro-tection which was passed in 1990. This applies in particular to the exclusion of research on embryos and other uses which are not in the interest of the embryo itself and which is laid down in the prevailing law on embryo protection.

3. The Central Committee of German Catholics rejects the introduction of the pre-implantation diagnosis in Germany. The pre-implantation diagnosis involves analysing the genetic make-up of embryos and checking for possible diseases be fore the egg is then implanted in the womb. Of course it is natural that all parents wish for a healthy child. However this should not lead to the destruction of embryos that are known to have genetically inherited diseases.

The Central Committee of German Catholics sees a very real danger of a tendency for selection of human life taking place if pre-implantation-diagnosis becomes legal - although supporters of this process claim that this will not be the case. In those countries where pre-implantation diagnosis is allowed, it has become clear that in practice it is very difficult to limit the process to only a small number of indications.

The Central Committee of German Catholics sees a further danger in the desire to avoid unnecessary suffering through the implementation of the pre-implantation diagnosis in those cases where parents are in danger of passing on genetically inherited diseases (this would be to satisfy the wishes of parents who are potential carriers of genetically inherited diseases). This could well lead to changes that go well beyond individual cases. In particular, this could encourage behaviour that is disparaging and negative when dealing with people that suffer physical or mental illness and which would increase the suffering of those affected or even set a pattern for negative behaviour in the first place. This would clear the way for a general development: a rapid change in attitude towards the dignity and respect for people suffering disability or illness which in turn would mean that all people who are sick or disabled would be seen in a different light.

4. It is a scandal that so-called late-term abortions are allowed in Germany almost up to the end of a pregnancy when a disease or disability is to be expected. For this reason the General Assembly demands that in accordance with declaration of the Central Committee of German Catholics of 16 February 1999 a political initiative be taken to prevent late-term abortions. This would involve better counselling aimed at preserving life prior to pre-natal diagnosis as well as after the diagnosis of an incurable disease or developmental disorders in an unborn child. Furthermore the clarification of the areas in which a medical indication (§ 218 a Section 2 Civil Code) can be applied, needs urgent attention. It should no longer be possible to use a medical indication for blanket application, quietly carrying out an abortion when a disease or disability is to be expected thus making the abortion legal. If the clarification of this cannot be achieved in any other way then legislators must undertake an amendment of § 218 a Section 2 Civil Code.

In addition, the legal liability of the doctors must be expanded and developed so that doctors are not prevented from encouraging parents to keep a child that may be disabled.

5. Nobody should be forced to make a diagnosis in the area of genetic engineering. In the paper “Predictive Gene Testing. Touchstones for a an Ethical and Legal Orientation” the Ethics Committee of the Federal Ministry of Health made some important suggestions on how so-called predictive gene testing should be applied. This paper notes that the so-called predictive gene testing can serve to help quite legitimately in preventative healthcare and in life-planning. The results of genetic diagnosis however can have such drastic implications for those affected that such a diagnosis must only be carried out with the consent of those concerned and that they must have the right to refuse such examinations. The Central Committee of German Catholics would like to take this argument one step further by demanding that insurance policies and employment contracts be deal with this issue thereby avoiding misuse and abuse.

6. The Central Committee of German Catholics regards the ban on the cloning of human embryos as imperative because the creation of embryos through cloning is a fundamental abuse of the individual and collective dignity of man. Embryos that are genetically identical should not be produced regardless of whether the aim is to produce a cloned child (so-called reproductive cloning) or to generate embryonic stem cells (so-called therapeutic cloning). There are neither social nor medical uses that could justify this process that would harm the inviolable dignity of human life. In the case of therapeutic cloning, it is open to debate whether the cloning of human embryos is necessary or even of use in those areas of therapeutic cloning where it is intended for use.

The results of scientific research show that the methods used for the cloning of embryos carry incalculable risks for the developing human being. The Central Committee of German Catholics has established that the difference between the two methods of cloning defined by the cloning supporters, the reproductive and the therapeutic, are not stable long-term concepts. The Central Committee of German Catholics believes that in view of the aims of therapeutic cloning, it would be advisable to support the ethically acceptable alternatives such as research using adult stem cells.

7. The Central Committee of German Catholics calls on all Catholic communities and organisations to consider the questions set down here very carefully. It is cause for great concern that the image of a perfect, vital, forever young and healthy person has become central to the mentality and behaviour of this society. This will have dramatic consequences for those with real pain and disability, for those suffering unavoidable illness and the manner in which they are accepted by others in our society. This means that the following questions are a necessary part of our discourse. Firstly, what makes a human into a human being, secondly, how do we deal with our finite life, what images and visions influence our behaviour and what limits should be put on our actions in order to retain our humanity?

Bonn-Bad Godesberg, 4. May 2001.