Abstract
Every gesture is a moral gesture, and every moral gesture, every decision creates a narrative that is at once personal and public, at once unique and taken within a tradition of human moral activities. Nowhere is this more true than in reproductive medicine, and no tradition stronger or more closely held than traditions of religious practices. Thus, emerging reproductive technology has become one of primary ethical attention and concern for religion. For the three Abrahamic religious traditions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the story of Hagar, the young slave used as a surrogate mother to Abraham’s firstborn son Ishmael, is the shared ground for the first family of faith, and it is fully of drama and tragic necessity. In the Hebrew Scripture, as noted above, the effort to create a child outside of the usual narrative of marriage does not go happily, and for Muslims, the plight of Hajar (Arabic for Hagar) is central to the Hajj, the required pilgrimage to Mecca, in which her frantic search for water to maintain her son, after they are cast out and left in the desert, is one in which she runs back and forth seven times between two peaks, Al-Safa and Al-Marwah. This physical act of desperation is replicated, as thus, the pilgrim must use his/her body to re-enact the seven circuits in the desert heat, running up and down the hills. The drama of the third party is repeated, reenacted, and respoken so powerfully in these traditions that it clearly raised the question, “Why?” Especially as recounted of an historical era in which disempowered slave women were commonly seen as property, why is the text so attentive to the problem of the use of these women as mothers? It is a core question for scholars who seek to understand the positions of contemporary religious traditions and contemporary third-party reproductive projects, for such core foundational narratives capture both the desperation, frustration, and infinite yearning of infertility, and the ethical problems with the use of the body of another in the service of so central a human activity as childbirth. This chapter will briefly review some of the ethical and theological concerns of a number of traditions as they considered third-party reproduction.
Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian slave named Hagar; so she said to Abram, “The Lord has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.” Abram agreed to what Sarai said. So after Abram had been living in Canaan 10 years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. He slept with Hagar, and she conceived. When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress. Then Sarai said to Abram, “You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my slave in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the Lord judge between you and me.” “Your slave is in your hands,” Abram said. “Do with her whatever you think best.” Then Sarai mistreated Hagar; so she fled from her. The angel of the Lord found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur. And he said, “Hagar, slave of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going? “I’m running away from my mistress Sarai,” she answered. Then the angel of the Lord told her, “Go back to your mistress and submit to her.” The angel added, “I will increase your descendants so much that they will be too numerous to count.” The angel of the Lord also said to her: “You are now pregnant and you will give birth to a son. You shall name him Ishmael, for the Lord has heard of your misery. He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers. She gave this name to the Lord who spoke to her: “You are the God who sees me,” for she said, “I have now seen the One who sees me.” That is why the well was called Beer Lahai Roi; it is still there, between Kadesh and Bered. So Hagar bore Abram a son, and Abram gave the name Ishmael to the son she had borne. Abram was 86 years old when Hagar bore him Ishmael.
Genesis 16
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
1 This section is based on work done to explore the problem of oncofertility, done over several years with research contributions from a large set of undergraduates. The Zoloth-Henning chapter, which addresses the use of still-developing fertility-preservation technologies in the special case of cancer patients, can be found in Woodruff TK, Zoloth L, Campo-Engelstein L, and Rodriquez S, eds. Oncofertility: ethical, religious, legal, social, and medical issues. New York: Springer; 2010.
- 2.
2 Verhey A. Commodification, commercialization, and embodiment. Women’s Health Issues 1997 May/Jun; 7(3):133.
- 3.
3 Walzer M. Spheres of justice: a defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic Books; 1983, p. 88–102, as cited by Veheys, op cite.
References
Congregation for the doctrine of the faith. Instruction dignitas personae on certain bioethical questions. Sept 8, 2008; http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html. Accessed 31 Aug 2009.
Verhey A. Focus: Evangelical voices. Introduction. J Relig Ethics. 1989;17(2):77–9.
Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals. Defining the term in contemporary times. http://isae.wheaton.edu/defining-evangelicalism/defining-the-term-in-contemporary-times/. Accessed 30 Aug 2009.
National Association of Evangelicals. http://www.nae.net/index.cfm. Accessed 30 Aug 2009.
General Council of the Assemblies of God. Infertility. http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/relations_16_infertility.cfm. Accessed 28 Aug 2009.
Powell CMH. Respecting ethical boundaries in reproductive medicine. Enrichment J. 2008 (Summer). http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200803/200803_140_EthicsMedicine.cfm. Accessed 28 Aug 2009.
Price J. Embryo adoption. 9 Jan 2006; http://www.sbc.net/redirect.asp?url=http://www.erlc.com/article/embryo-adoption/&key=in+vitro&title=Embryo+Adoption&ndx=SBC,+IMB,+NAMB,+ANNUITY,+LIFEWAY,+WMU,+ERLC,+SEMINARIES. Accessed 29 Aug 2009.
Allen B. Southern baptist leader says in-vitro fertilization immoral. Ethicsdaily.com, 16 Jan 2008.
Connolly J. Top U.S. Evangelical leader: all involved with IVF responsible for “vast human tragedy.” http://www.LifeSiteNews.com, 11 Jan 2008.
Sachedina A. Islamic perspectives on research with human embryonic stem cells. In: Ethical issues in human stem cell research: religious perspectives. Rockville, MD: The National Bioethics Advisory Commission; June 2000:G-1–G-6.
Gatrad AR, Sheikh A. Medical ethics and Islam: principles as practice. Arch Dis Child. 2001;84(1):72–5.
Inhorn MC. Making Muslim babies: IVF and gamete donation in Sunni versus Shi'a Islam. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2006;30(4):427–50.
Ebrahim AFM. Biomedical issues: Islamic perspective. Kuala Lumpur: A.S. Noordeen; 1993.
Mackler AL. Is there a unique Jewish bioethics of human reproduction? Annu Soc Christ Ethics. 2001;21:319–23.
Dorff E. A Jewish approach to assisted reproductive technologies. Whittier Law Rev. 1999;21(2):391–400.
Biale R. Women and Jewish law: the essential texts, their history, and their relevance for today. New York: Schocken Books Inc.; 1995.
Dorff EN. Is there a unique Jewish ethics? The role of law in Jewish bioethics. Annu Soc Christ Ethics. 2001;21:305–17.
Schenker JG. Infertility evaluation and treatment according to Jewish law. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1997;71:113–21.
Bhattacharyya S. Magical progeny, modern technology: a hindu bioethics of assisted reproductive technology. Albany: State University of New York Press; 2006.
Widge A. Sociocultural attitudes towards infertility and assisted reproduction in India. Curr Pract Controversies Assist Reprod. 2002. https://www.who.int/reproductive-health/infertility/11.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2009.
Harvey P. An introduction to Buddhist ethics: foundations, values and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
Keown D. Buddhism and bioethics. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 1995.
Numrich PD. The problem with sex according to Buddhism. Dialog. J Theol. 2009;48(1):62–73.
Taniguchi S. Biomedical ethics from a Buddhist perspective. Pacific World New Series. 1987;3(Fall):75–83.
Freedman B. Duty and healing: foundations of a Jewish bioethic. New York: Routledge; 1999.
Haas JM. Begotten not made: a catholic view of reproductive technology. http://www.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/98rlphaa.shtml. Accessed 29 Aug 2009.
Sarma D. “Hindu” Bioethics? J Law Med Ethics. 2008;36(1):51–8.
Acknowledgments
We thank Nissim Benvenisty, Hebrew University. We also thank the undergraduate students in the winter 2008 and fall 2008 quarters of the Religion and Bioethics class of Northwestern University and Victor O’Halloran, a summer intern for the Oncofertility Consortium, for their assistance in researching and preparing material for this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zoloth, L., Henning, A.A. (2014). Hagar’s Child: Theology, Ethics, and the Third Party in Emerging Reproductive Technology. In: Goldfarb, J. (eds) Third-Party Reproduction. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7169-1_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7169-1_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7168-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7169-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)