Fons Vitae, in collaboration with the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine (IIRRM) and the Women’s Reproductive Health Foundation (WRHF), organized the inaugural interdisciplinary seminar, “Theology and Reproduction: Ethical and Medical Considerations of Modern Reproductive Medicine,” held June 28 to July 1, 2026.
The seminar brought together medical students, health care professionals, bioethics experts, and other scholars to explore the medical, ethical, and theological dimensions of modern reproductive medicine, in particular two different infertility solutions: in vitro fertilization (IVF) and restorative reproductive medicine (RRM).
The seminar was intended “to spur a cross-disciplinary dialogue about reproductive medicine in both its personal and social contexts,” said Fons Vitae executive director Peter Casarella, professor of theology at Duke Divinity School. “By bringing together clinical, epidemiological, theological, bioethical, and pastoral experts, we aim to discover how to improve the health of couples, children, and families while promoting the common good of society.”
Dr. Joseph Stanford delivered the keynote address, “Restorative Reproductive Medicine for Infertility,” which examined the clinical features and evidence base for RRM. Dr. Stanford holds the presidential chair in RRM at the University of Utah Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine and serves as director of research for the IIRRM and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine. Responding to the keynote was Dr. John Gordon, medical director at Rejoice Fertility in Knoxville, Tenn., and division director of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at University of Tennessee Medical Center. A panel discussion and Q&A were moderated by Dr. Rachel Urrutia, obstetrician/gynecologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
The seminar curriculum considered classical medical frameworks alongside Catholic teaching and natural law traditions, in contrast with frameworks of utilitarianism and principlism that increasingly shape contemporary medicine, public health, and bioethics. Professor Casarella and fellow seminar faculty member Dr. John Thorp, who jointly teach a yearlong Duke–UNC undergraduate fellowship examining these themes, traced the shift in reproductive medicine from a historically paternalistic model toward a modern “provider of services” model, in which physicians function as providers of patient-preferred services rather than as professionals exercising prudential judgment about their patients’ health.
“Medicine is not simply a marketplace of services and technologies,” said Dr. Thorp. “It is a moral profession ordered toward the good of the patient. As reproductive medicine becomes increasingly technologized, we have to ask not only what we can do, but what we should do. Restorative reproductive medicine challenges us to explore a model in which there is physician-patient solidarity oriented toward the good of the patient and a common understanding of what that good is.”
The seminar highlighted restorative reproductive care as a critical area of study. Faculty members advocating the restorative model argued that it is healthier and less costly than IVF, while eliminating an increasing number of ethical questions surrounding ART practices including those related to third-party gametes, surrogacy, embryo cryopreservation, and preimplantation genetic testing. Faculty members advocating for IVF shared details of their programs, including how they deliver care prior to IVF and how they work to meet the moral and ethical needs of their patients.
The seminar concluded with a synthesis session in which participants reflected on the principal themes that emerged throughout the week, the inclusion of differing perspectives, and the sincerity and civility of discussion. A strong recommendation surfaced for more attention to be committed to the psychological challenges experienced by infertility patients, with an emerging theme around the idea of “fertility stewardship” as a possible umbrella concept capable of integrating the seminar’s diverse medical, ethical, and theological themes.
