#in vitro fertilisation

This article analyses the ‘slippery slope’ argument as a means of rejecting euthanasia, outlining its logical, consequentialist structure and four negative consequences commonly cited: the acceptance of involuntary euthanasia, pressure on the patient, the erosion of the doctor-patient relationship, and the weakening of the prohibition on killing. The proposed conclusion is that the argument remains valuable as a complementary element of Christian moral reflection, not as a sufficient ethical basis in itself.

The article analyses the significance of the human person in the context of medically assisted reproduction, contrasting two opposing approaches: the Roman Catholic approach, which rejects these methods on the grounds that they undermine human dignity by separating the conjugal act from procreation, and that of bioethicists such as John Harris and Torbjörn Tännsjö, who accept them on the grounds of reproductive freedom. From the perspective of Orthodox theology, assisted reproduction does not, by definition, infringe upon human dignity, provided that it is therapeutic in nature, is intended for the spouses, and does not result in the destruction of embryos.