Children conceived (in vitro) after father's death


People Magazine had an article about war widows who went through in vitro (husband’s sperm) after their husband’s had been killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Both had infertility issues; the husband’s sperm was frozen before deployment.

If a woman is pregnant and her husband dies, it can’t be helped. Or if a father chooses to leave, there’s not much the mom can do. But these women purposely had children after the father had died. I felt so sad when I read it. —KCT


That is awful! :frowning: That a mother would purposely deprive her children of a father, which to me, is essentially what happens in these kinds of situations, is very sad indeed.


It is harsh and cruel to some I’m sure, but I think this is entirely selfish on the part of the wife. A baby will not replace a husband, and bringing a child into a fatherless family, deliberately, is entirely selfish.

Not to mention - how many babies did she have to kill during the IVF process to get one to term? :mad:

Yes - it is indeed very sad.



I disagree with how it happened. I’m against it. But I have to say I can understand the desire. And what a comfort it might be to the soldier’s grieving parents to have a grandchild from him. To see him live on in a child and see his eyes or chin or smile on the face of a grandchild.

Often with long deployments, there isn’t time to conceive. If it doesn’t happen before they go, it may be another year before you can even try.

So I can understand why someone in her grief might want to have a child by a husband she loved and lost.

I wouldn’t beat her up for that. I feel sad for the young wives who mourn their husbands and they didn’t yet have a child. And many are pregnant when their husbands die and bring a child into the world without a father. But they do have a father. He’ll always be their father. There are worse ways to lose a father than through death, you know. I know of one woman who was in L&D not knowing her husband was being shot and killed at that very time.

I’ve seen way more selfish things done in my life for much less loving reasons.

I don’t agree. But I can understand.


What I don’t understand, really, is why someone would freeze her spouse’s sperm before him leaving for deployment. It just seems rather morbid…


Hey! I wanted to say exactly that! You beat me to it!


Most guys bank prior to treatment of testicular cancer. What if they don’t survive the cancer? Tim


Does not make it morally right, even if he does live. My ex had testicular cancer and we chose to not bank (even though I worked in a fertility clinic at the time). We had serious issues with reproductive technologies (why I don’t work there any more) and decided to leave it in God’s hands.



They were having fertility treatments, so there were sperm available for that. They didn’t freeze it because they thought he would die overseas. —KCT (sorry, that wasn’t clear)


Actually I think I can see their logic. I mean, if your husband was leaving for war, and you both wanted a kid. Maybe they agreed to do this in case the worst happened so she could still have a part of him live on. Although the IVF is a question. :slight_smile: I could see why it would be done by a couple for AI, but IVF is a new one. hehe


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit