After three long essays in the New York Times’s “Embryo Question,” the series ends with a stunning confession of complete indecision about what the human embryo is — aside from the assertion that “Their meaning can only ever be contingent.” If it sounds like nothingness, that is the premise.
The first essay in the series serves as an introduction to the question. What is our “obligation” to the embryos, and what is the boundary of scientific research? It convinces the reader, belonging to whichever persuasion, of the other side’s actual investment in the matter. It follows that the second essay pushes into the uncomfortable — or morally reprehensible — topic of genetic screening and optimization through companies such as Orchid. Author Anna Louie Sussman applies experience with video footage of her child’s development as an embryo and, in doing so, pulls away slightly from the free-rein position on embryo use she described throughout.
