Dignitas Personae and Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Life

(Comparative Analysis)

Considering the content of the two documents I can’t find any great disparity among the

two, the documents are concerned with the dignity of human life. Only that, the process varies on

delivering the concerns about human life. Dignitas Personae is concerned with the dynamics of

human life particularly the modification of the body to become healthy, perfect, and desirable.

While the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Life is concerned with the laws and

principles only and a general declaration about the do’s and don’ts of human life.

In Dignitas Personae, the role of the church has been emphasized that there are church

documents that declare contrary to the science such as “Donum Vitae” and one of the issues

regarding medical sciences are the following. First, is the aspects of human life and Procreation.

It has been made mention in the document that the origin of human life has its authentic context

in marriage and the family.  It means, the most licit and desiring for a child to born is when

he/she is born deliberately from or within the context of married life, outside of it is already a sin

and must be prohibited in every family. Furthermore, human life must be respected because we

are created in the image and the likeness of God. So, full respect for the dignity of human life

should be maintained to avoid degradation of life and discrimination. Because the church is the

number one protector of the poor people, the marginalized and the powerless, and so, if there are

members of the community who had been deprived of their rights as humans, as the son of God

the church will not stop to protecting them. Indeed, the intervention of the Magisterium falls

within its mission of contributing to the formation of conscience. The church does not only save

the poor but to let the people develop their conscience as the son God who has the care for his

fellow men and women who are living in one ground. So, the church plays a big role in

preserving the dignity of human life as created originally by God.

publication of the Donum Vitae. It was stated in Dignitas Personae that the problem of the couple

to produce a child should not be replaced by heterologous artificial fertilization. But on

techniques which act as an aid to the conjugal act and its fertility is recommended. The reason

why artificial fertilization is not permitted because only the conjugal act of the couple is a

relevant and most permitted act which is stated in the Donum Vitae. That is why adoptions are

encouraged for the couples who cannot produce a child because the doctors can only help the

couple in terms of fertility troubles and replace it. 

Another is IVF, in particular of destroying the embryos. Albeit, losing the embryos

according to the doctors is not deliberated because it depends upon the process of the treatment

and the condition of a woman but mostly it is willed because if the embryos are problematic,

they destroy it. Another reason for using this IVF is the couple, they wanted to have a perfect

offspring and had no other lacking in physical appearance which would result in an unethical

way of procreation. According to Donum Vitae having a physical impediment as a person does

not make him/her less as human humans, he/she has still had the dignity and that should be

respected by all. Every human being in this world has owned dignity and rights to exercise his

will, meaning the right to live in this world is assigned to every individual, and violence to it is

highly discouraged. Thus, what treatment particularly IVF is highly discouraged by its process

and modification of the cells though, there some treatment that is permitted such as the purpose

of medication or a cure for a problematics cells but not to modify it if this is a normal condition.

There are persons who wanted to perfect the child to be born and would recourse to medical

science to make it in which imprudent in some view particularly if we look at the declaration

from the Donum Vitae which is concerned with the importance of the human life. 
 However, in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Life is more on ethical

principles and the states who would ensure the welfare of the people particularly in the respect

for human life. Also, technology plays a big role in the developing society which affects the

understanding of the self the people and somehow can divert the focus of everyone that could

destroy life. And this accelerating technology should be given full attention in line with the

dignity of human life that human life should be still owned full dignity. Thus, the state

universally needs to have a clear study to address this technology that could probably destroy the

dignity of human life and the environment.

The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human life has no bearing from the church’s

document and so purely coming from the state itself whether from international or local society.

This declaration is considered as a guideline for the emerging science and technology that it is

addressed for future developments not just for the present generation. Indeed, every human being

is responsible for taking care of his companion who receives life including the animals. And the

technology and medical science could help the people realize is dignity as a human being

because the health is dependent on scientific-technological effects when people experience

problems with their bodies. And also, a person’s identity includes biological, psychological,

social, cultural, and spiritual dimensions, that’s why the society must be safeguarded to ensure

full respect and the care for the human life. Thus, the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and

Human Life focus on the community itself; its primary condition to maintained as fair in the

rights by every person in the society there must have no degradation of dignity.

For the Reaction-Analysis, I will be using the Dignitas Personae as a lens. The reason

why I used this as a lens, is to level-off the two documents because the Dignitas Personae uses

the Church’s documents specifically the Donum Vitae, and as we know that this document has a
related topic in other documents that tackled about life such as Evangelium Vitae and Humanae

Vitae. And for me, this is very suited to look life from the perspective of the Church for we

consider that the human person is created by the image and likeness of God. 

However, it doesn’t mean that the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human life no

relevance anymore only that it focuses more on the norms from international going to the

domestic community. The description made by this declaration looks only to the laws and only in

the laws which is also right and there is no question about that, but, it is good also that we divert

our focus to other possibilities such as the laws from the church which is originally connected to

the law of God about life. For me, the problem arises of these two documents in terms of its

perspective but they are all effective and contributed to nurturing human life.

Indeed, the declaration on Bioethics and human life must weigh the church documents.

As I observe it, the declaration tells only the rules about what is right and what is right about the

mutilation of the body particularly in the conception of the child. The doctors also would depend

on the laws handed down by the state including the full consent of the family members. So, the

government has the primary obligation to maintain the health of the people in society and to

promote in nurturing the dignity of human life. Thus, the Declaration on Bioethics and human

life is applicable in the daily experience of the people in the society particularly in dealing with

their lives amidst the diverse culture and tradition of the people in the community. But the

problem will come from the view that the people will only focus on the norms of the state and

ignore the church’s norms about human life especially its sacredness.

Furthermore, the state and the church are most of the time against each other in terms of

implementing the laws to the people. An example is these two documents as what I made

mention above that Dignitas Personae emanates its norms from the perspective of the church
while the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human life are purely from the state to the

society. But what is good in the documents is that the Dignitas Personae will serve as a guide for

the Declaration on Bioethics and Human Life in terms of its implementation. The church has a

universal and profound insight of every human being not just all about for the good of the person

itself but to let them realize the importance of life. That in some way there is a ground in which a

person is not allowed to do so. For instance, the IVF, some couples would likely to have a child

and will adopt because they wanted that the child will come from them, and so, they will go for

IVF to have a child that they cannot provide. The norms from the state allow it as stated in the

Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Life with certain probation as well with a

corresponding back up explanation why the government allows it and why they did not allow it.

meanwhile, the explanation from the state is very narrow focuses only on the experience of the

people in the society and which is good.

However, when we laid it to the church’s documents it will go something unique. The

church’s back up explanation why it is not permitted to recourse in IVF because it destroys some

cells inside the body of a woman and of the child to be born. One of these is that embryos, we

know that in the time of perception the church considered it human having a “life” already and

must not be disregarded by the doctors. Compared to the norms from the government on IVF,

they will allow the doctors to destroy the embryos because they believe that it is not a human yet;

so, there is no life and must be taken for granted especially if the child is having a problem in his

physical appearance. So generally, the two documents have contributed a lot in handling the

people in the society regarding their decision-making with their life. Thus, the documents help

the sphere in bioethics to understand life particularly its importance and sacredness as a

reflection to God’s perfect being.