Dr. Irving's professional activities include teaching positions at Georgetown University, Catholic University of America, and The Dominican House of Studies. She represented the Catholic Medical Association of the United States, and the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, at the Scientific Conference in Mexico City, Mexico, October 28, 1999 and presented a paper on "The Dignity and Status of the Human Embryo". Dr. Irving is a former career-appointed bench research biochemist/biologist (NIH, NCI, Bethesda, MD), an M.A. and Ph.D. philosopher (Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.), and Professor of the History of Philosophy, and of Medical Ethics.
See also: Dr. Irving's commentaries on this site.
Contact: DNIrving@aol.com
It is no shocking news that many physicians and researchers have been purposefully "doctoring" the real objective scientific facts of human embryology and related sciences for decades now in order to achieve their various goals. Whatever their reasons, it is clear that no one, and no professional organization, intends to admit the truth about what they are doing. At this point, the only rational thing to do is to sit back and watch the latest funny show.
Date posted: 2009-10-10
The abuse of language, especially scientific "language", has shrouded clear facts about precisely when the "first moment of its existence is", and has hastened this drastic decline in the respect for human life. It is not just because of the willful and devious use of language by ardent supporters of unethical medicine and research, but also because even many of those who are dedicated to this "safeguarding" themselves fall victim to the use of erroneous "scientific" terms. There are a number of ways that the misuse of simple scientific "language" can slip into our rhetoric and our thinking processes without notice.
Date posted: 2009-06-12
Bioethics is not Catholic ethics – and any feeble attempt to “convert” secular bioethics to Catholic medical ethics is a total exercise in futility and wishful thinking. Rather, bioethics is the newest of dozens of different kinds of ethics. It was created out of thin air in 1978 by 11 politically appointed people (most of whom had no academic degrees in philosophy or ethics), by mandate of the U.S. Congress with their Belmont Report.
Date posted: 2009-05-29
In a recent article in the New York Times by Peter Steinfels ("Roman Catholics' War Over Abortion", NYTimes, May 9, 2009) Steinfels attempts to "explain" the concerns of Roman Catholics over the invitation to President Obama to speak and receive an honorary doctorate degree at Notre Dame University by marginalizing that opposition. While his remarks may come off as classic dissident American Catholic and is a bit "tacky", he is probably accurate to describe these efforts as exemplifying a "civil war" among American Catholics. And it's about time ... if not too late.
Date posted: 2009-05-10
Consider the young teenagers or college students in today's society. We'll call one of them Margaret. For whatever reason, Margaret suspects that she might be pregnant, and sincerely begins to try to inform her conscience about whether or not to seek out "emergency contraceptives". She starts by seeking the advice of others whose counseling, knowledge and work she respects and trusts.
Date posted: 2009-04-20
Pharmacists, hospitals, doctors and nurses should definitely not have to do abortions against their conscience. To force them by law or regulation to do so would force them to kill innocent living human beings. Such a law or regulation would be de facto a grossly unjust law that should not be tolerated by any civilized society. Those who would force others to kill innocent human beings at the request of others often attempt to appeal to false scientific claims.
Date posted: 2009-04-14
An "exciting" new method of producing human "stem cells" to cure Parkinson's and many other debilitating diseases was recently announced as "breaking news" on U-tube (Dr. Oz to Oprah and Michael J Fox): "The stem cell debate is dead." But three things are important to distinguish before iPS research is so enthusiastically embraced as an "ethical alternative to human embryonic stem cell research".
Date posted: 2009-04-10
Oddly enough, several related issues involving the early human embryo and the use of various "abortifacients" that apparently had been laid to rest for several years are currently having a "rebirth", if you will. For example, if ovulation and fertilization have taken place, could the use of such "contraceptives" also be abortifacient and thus cause the death of this early developing human embryo either while still in the woman's Fallopian tube or when attempting to implant in her uterus? Or is there sufficient Doubt about this to justify their use?
Date posted: 2009-03-27
Summary: And his words had made me stop and ponder about any moral obligations and moral accountability I might have as a brand new research scientist myself. What exactly had taken place in those Nazi medical experiments with human subjects? How could such brilliant scientists and physicians have conceived and carried out such abominable crimes against humanity in the name of "science" and "the greater good"? "Well, they were just 'untermenchen', and going to die anyway; might as well get some good out of them"!
Date posted: 2009-03-13
The bottom line is that there is absolutely no question whatsoever as to when human beings begin to exist, and that arguments for “delayed personhood” can neither be scientifically nor philosophically defended successfully. To legally deny the youngest of new living innocent human beings their inherent right to life is unquestionably an obvious and odious violation of their civil rights, and it is about time that all involved in these debates be held to accountability.
Date posted: 2009-03-11