Stem cells are cells in the human body that have the potential to develop into any of the many different cells found in the human body. There are two types of stem cells: embryonic and adult. Here we will focus on the embryonic stem cells. Stem cells were first introduced as a possible area of research by the idea of them possibly being able to cure diseases, such as diabetes, Parkinson's, and ALS. In 2006, Congress had voted to approve stem cell research, only to be vetoed by George W. Bush since he thought it was unethical due to it destroying the blastocyst, an unimplanted embryo at the sixth to the eighth day of development and that the federal government should not support the "taking of innocent human life". Sandal states in his book that there are 3 main questions that this research proposes: should embryo stem cell research be permitted, should it be funded by the government, and should it matter if stem cells are taken from already existing embryos left over from fertility treatments or from cloned embryos. He describes the first question as the most intractable. The main argument against this research is that it destroys a human embryo, which some see as equivalent to killing a child. This is where most of the debates over stem cell research are derived from today. The second question that arises from the stem cell debate will be determined by the answers to the first. If the answer to the first question is a complete opposition to stem cell research, there would be no funding from the government. However, if stem cell research is ever deemed ethical to some degree and is permitted, the debate as to whether the government should fund it would be brought into question. Some may believe that the government should get involved as this research could be potentially life-saving and improve the quality of life for its citizens. Others may think that government involvement in funding is not necessary and would cross the line of where the government's influence should stop. Sandal then goes into whether there is a moral difference in the use of "excess" embryos or cloned ones. As of right now, there is no federal law that prohibits cloning of an embryo, mostly due to most officials and public opinion oppose it. Many oppose cloning because they believe a cloned embryo is still a person, bringing us back to the main argument of this research: that destroying an embryo is essentially killing a person. However, many argue for the idea of using "excess" embryos from fertility clinics in research because if they are just going to be discarded, we might as well use them for potentially life-saving research. This position was defended by the Senate, the Senate's only physician, and by the then Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. However, from this position, another argument arises. Whether or not fertility clinics would have two types of donations, one for IVF, which too many fertilized embryos are already being made, and donations specifically for stem cell research.
Questions:
1) What are embryonic stem cells and at what stage of fertilization are they obtained from?
2) Which president vetoed the bill for stem cell research that was voted for and approved by Congress?
3) What is one of the three questions that arise from stem cell research, according to Sandal?
4) Why is there no federal law prohibiting cloning of an embryo as of right now?
5) What position was defended by the Senate, the Senate's physician, and Mitt Romney regarding stem cell research?
No comments:
Post a Comment