Bioethical Observations on the "Istanbul Consensus": Scientism and Omission of the Human Aspect in Human Embryology

Abstract

The "Istanbul Consensus" offers a set of consensus points to classify human embryos into three "quality" categories (good, fair and poor), based on morphological criteria established by experts in embryology who are dedicated to the application of assisted reproductive technology in humans.

The need for an interdisciplinary dialogue is proposed in this article, particularly one that overcomes scientific reductionism and understands and prudently analyzes the diverse implications that are linked inevitably to the use of human embryos as “objects” to be applied in a technique supposedly devoid of ethical, human, anthropological, philosophical and legal implications. The concept of the personal condition particular to each human being is underscored, regardless of whatever utilitarian criteria might be assigned to these embryos, which are subject to the will and power of third persons in one of the phases of greatest existential fragility; namely, when they are turned into disposable "biological material".  The concept of teleological autonomy – the anthropological status of the human embryo – is reinforced and the need for a thorough understanding of the meaning of what is human is emphasized as a contribution of bioethics and interdisciplinary dialogue on behalf of a valid and honest scientific approach in this field of techno- scientific application.