Have your own question? Then pitch it to us!
Charles C. Camosy, PhD Answers:
In the abstract there is nothing wrong with this procedure, and it could be a beneficial and morally praiseworthy choice if it was directed at the benefit of the child. For instance, a couple worried that that they were particularly susceptible to having a child with genetic disease might need to save money to be able to provide medical care and otherwise prepare for this possibility. Their being prepared would not only benefit the family as a whole, but it would benefit the child as well.
However, in practice, this procedure is often used in a way such that is not aimed at the best interest of the child. Quite the contrary: many times it results even in the child’s death. For instance, over 90% of babies who are diagnosed with Down syndrome in utero are aborted. These practices play into our culture’s tragic (and ever-growing) understanding of our youngest children as mere objects to do with as we please. Even by using the very word “reproduction” (as opposed to procreation) we signal that our children are “products” that are subject to all the kinds of quality-control that a free market demands for savvy customers. This, according to the Catholic Church, is a fundamental misunderstanding of the value of our children—and puts vulnerable populations (in this case the disabled and the very young) at risk of marginalization and violence.