Few advances in modern science have generated as much excitement and public debate as the discovery of human embryonic stem cells (hESC). The debate over the use of embryonic stem cells in research has polarized the global community along the lines of those who argue that such research holds the promise of medical breakthroughs for many currently incurable diseases and ailments, while opponents condemn such research as it involves the destruction of a potential human life and is seen as humanity “playing God”. There are no clear cut answers to the moral debate concerning this particular area of stem cell research. At the core of the debate lies the ethical question of which is the more valuable; the life of a human being suffering from a fatal illness or life threatening injury, or the life of a potential human being? These are the difficult questions faced by both the scientists engaged in the research, the legislators who define the laws governing such research and the public as a whole. While many agree that embryonic stem cell research has the potential of developing treatments for a number of afflictions that affect humankind, if such research cannot be performed without the the cost of destroying a life it should therefore not be pursued.
Experimentation with embryonic stem cells has become an important breakthrough in current medical research. Why is this? According to Medical News Today, these embryonic stem cells are considered the most useful for research due to their pluripotent nature (MNT, July 2013). What this means according the National Institutes of Health Stem Cell Information Center, is that embryonic stem cells are considered to be unspecialized or master cells. Being unspecialized or “undifferentiated” in sci...
... middle of paper ...
... S. Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. Print.
Mukhopadhyay, C. S., Jayanti Tokas, and P. D. Mathur. "Prospects and Ethical Concerns of Embryonic Stem Cells Research-A Review." Veterinary World 4.6 (2011): 281-6. Print.
Ruiz-Canela, Miguel. “Embryonic Stem Cell Research: The Relevance of Ethics in the Progress of Science.” Med Sci Monit, 2002; 8(5) (2002): SR21-26. Print.
“Stem Cell Information Center.” National Institutes of Health. 2009. Web.
Steinbock, Bonnie. “The Science, Policy, and Ethics of Stem Cell Research.” Reproductive BioMedicine Online, Vol.14. Supplement 1. (2007): 130-136. Print.
Sullivan, Dr. Dennis M., Costerisan, Aaron. “Complicity and Stem Cell Research: Countering the Utilitarian Argument.” Ethics & Medicine, 24:3 (2008): 151-158. Print.
Stem cell research has been a heated and highly controversial debate for over a decade, which explains why there have been so many articles on the issue. Like all debates, the issue is based on two different arguments: the scientific evolution and the political war against that evolution. The debate proves itself to be so controversial that is both supported and opposed by many different people, organizations, and religions. There are many “emotional images [that] have been wielded” in an attempt to persuade one side to convert to the other (Hirsen). The stem cell research debate, accompanied by different rhetoric used to argue dissimilar points, comes to life in two articles and a speech: “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? Yes, Don’t Impede Medical Progress” by Virginia Postrel; “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? No, It’s a Moral Monstrosity” by Eric Cohen and William Kristol; and “Remarks by Ron Reagan, Jr., to the 2004 Democratic National Convention” by Ron Reagan, Jr. Ethos, pathos, and logos are the main categories differentiating the two arguments.
A person's individuality begins at conception and develops throughout life. These natural developments can now be changed through genetically engineering a human embryo. Through this process, gender, eye and hair color, height, medical disorders, and many more qualities can be changed. I believe genetically engineering a human embryo is corrupt because it is morally unacceptable, violates the child's rights, and creates an even more divided society.
“Federal Funds Should Not Be Used for Research That Destroys Embryos.” Stem Cells. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints.
In the debate over whether the federal government should fund embryonic stem-cell research (ESCR), our country is being offered a true Faustian bargain. In return for a hoped-for potential - it is no more than that - of deriving desperately desired medical breakthroughs in the treatment of such afflictions as Parkinson's disease, paraplegia, and diabetes, we are being asked to give the nation's imprimatur to reducing human life into a mere natural resource to be exploited and commodified.
" An Overview of Stem Cell Research | The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity."
...ns of a morally questionable nature. It is necessary that our practices remain ethical and that we uphold the value of a human life, as this is the cornerstone of human society. Embryonic stem cell research is one such operation that forces scientists, policy makers, and the larger society to define what constitutes a human life and to find an answer to the crucial question: Is it morally acceptable to violate the rights of a human life for the for the sake of medical progress?
Francis (Ed.), At Issue. Should the Government Fund Embryonic Stem Cell Research?. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. (2009). (Reprinted from, n.d.) (Reprinted from Science Magazine, 22 September 2006) Retrieved from http://padme.cochise.edu:2067/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints&prodId=OVIC&action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010587207&userGroupName=sier28590&jsid=67271fc8c381f89007dff41cfd3813e6
Siegel, A. (2008). Ethics of Stem Cell Research. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/stem-cells/.
The President’s Council on Bioethics published “Monitoring Stem Cell Research” in 2004. This report was written in response to President Bush’s comments regarding research of human stem cells on August 9, 2001. President Bush announced that he was going to make federal funding available for research that involved existing lines of stem cells that came from embryos. He is the first president to provide any type of financial support for the research of human stem cells. A Council was created with people who are educated in the field of stem cells to help monitor the research and to recommend guidelines and consider the ethical consequences that this research could create. This report is an “update” given by the President’s Council in January of 2004 to make the public aware of the significant developments in the science and medical aspects of stem cell research. It also describes the ethical, legal and political implications that stem cell research may create. However, since the research is still in its beginning stages, this “update” does not describe a complete or definitive study of stem cells nor does it provide specific guidelines or regulations. This is a report that is suppose to help the President, Congress and general public make better-informed decisions as to the direction that we should go with stem cells.
The ethical issues behind the method in which stem cells are obtained out weigh the benefits of stem cell therapy. We should not try to play God, in the aspect of creation of living beings just to be sacrificed for the “betterment of mankind”. Many egregious acts have been committed under the guise of “the greater good”. This is one instance in which the ends do not justify the means.
Monroe, Kristen, et al., eds. Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical and Political Issues. Los Angeles/Berkley: University of California Press, 2008. Print
From the discussion above it is very clear that there are different opinions on the pros and cons of stem cell research. Based on the recent researches, scientists have the capability to work out the alternatives for embryonic stem cell research. And the usefulness compare to embryonic stem cell remains unknown. Undeniably, the stem cell research issue has its most complex parts to be resolved and surmounted. But perhaps we can disclose the way to carry out stem cell research with the balance of bioethics and most importantly, do no harm for humankind one day.
Stem cells offer exciting promise for future therapies, but significant technical hurdles remain that will only be overcome through years of intensive research. Stem Cells have the incredible potential to develop into many different cell types in the body during early life and growth. Scientists primarily work with two kinds of stem cells from animals and humans. The embryonic stem cells and the non-embryonic stem cells. Stem cells are the cells from which all other cells originate. In a human embryo, a large portion of the embryo’s cells are stem cells. These stem cells can be used for cell-based therapies. Cell-Based therapies are treatments in which stem cells are induced to differentiate into the specific cell type required to repair damaged or destroyed cells or tissues. Stem cells are versatile and offer the possibility to treat a number of diseases including Alzheimer’s, stroke, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, etc. The problem is that for the process of embryonic stem cell research and embryo will be destroyed if used. This raises a moral issue and questions of whether stem cell research is unethical or not.
Anderson, Ryan. "Stem Cells: A Political History." First Things. First Things, November, 2008. Web. 10 Feb 2012.
Engineering Ethics of Public Information Information is one of the most powerful commodities of modern humans. In his 2007 Nobel Prize acceptance speech, R. K. Pachauri described public knowledge and information as critical for affecting regulatory policy and legislation. Although Pachauri was describing the work of the IPCC and Al Gore, this idea that the presentation of technical information to the community can greatly impact the future of humanity is also relevant when considering the stem cell research. Specifically, Clara Bartlett outlines a scenario where, in the context of a social gathering, a genetic engineer has heard misinformation from opposite sides of the stem cell research debate; both individuals express an opinion backed