Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Stem Cells moral dilemma
Debate over government funding of stem cell research
governement funding to embryonic stem cell research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Stem Cells moral dilemma
On April 28, 2011 - the United States Appeals Court overturned the rule of a federal judge because of several issues that emerged with stem cell research being funded by the government. Although, the science of human embryonic stem cell is in its initial stages - there is much hope for scientific advancement due to the ability for human embryonic stem cells to grow into virtually various kinds of cells Favorably, advocates for stem cell research and pharmaceutical companies strongly believe that stem cells may pave a way to discover new methods of treatment for devastating ailments; such as, Leukemia, Alzheimer’s disease, Heart disease, Parkinson’s disease and diabetes- a prospect that is inspiring to both scientists and those who are seeking cures for themselves and family members. In contrast, numerous pro-life advocates are against federal funding for stem cell research because of the method in which these stem cells are extracted. In addition, several other groups argue that the federal government has abandoned more substantial as well as promising and less controversial adult and cord stem cell research. Instead, the government has dedicated a majority of their funding in favor of the more popular and controversial stem research. Ultimately, as long as humans exist - the need for a more extensive and technological progress will be abundant and crucial to humanity's survival. However, does the needs of the human species outweigh the potential lives embryos represent? With so much on the line, let us explore exactly what human embryonic stem cell (HESC) research is and what may be potentially weighing in the balance for the human race if we proceed down this road.
Human embryonic stem cells derive from over 100+ types of...
... middle of paper ...
...eadlines on a regular basis it cannot be denied the importance of it no matter the controversies that may follow. Life saving technologies is within our reach. It almost sounds as though maybe someday we can order body parts from our doctor like we order car parts from our mechanic. However, what is the cost? At first glance, one would think that this is an issue of whether an embryo is indeed a human, but when you pull back the onion, the issue is more ethical than scientific. If we do not share the same ideals/moral codes how can we agree on whether human embryos deserve the right same rights as you and I. Because both moral principals—The duty to prevent vs. The duty to respect the value of human life—are impossible to honor both. With that said, because our cultures are so diverse, there may never be a consensus between the two groups.
Are embryonic stem cells the cure to many of the human body’s ailments, including defective organs and crippling diseases, or is their use a blatant disregard of human rights and the value of life? Thanks to the rapid advancements in this field, the potential benefits of stem cells are slowly becoming reality. However, embryonic stem cell research is an extremely divisive topic in the United States thanks to the ethical issues surrounding terminating embryos to harvest the stem cells. In response to this debate, Congress passed the Dickey-Wicker amendment in 1995 to prohibit federal funding of research that involved the destruction of embryos. President Bush affirmed this decision, but more recently President Obama lifted many of these restrictions. Despite the significant portion of Americans that do not support embryonic stem cell research, it should be federally funded because of the potential health benefits, the definition of human, and the opportunity to clearly define regulations for ethical research.
In President Barack Obama’s speech of 2009, he issued an executive order which lifted the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, placed by the President George W. Bush. Obama addresses important factors of why he removed the ban such as keeping innovative scientists in the country and the many future promises the research holds. The president is biased towards the future of using embryonic stem cells in his speech― he strongly supports them and strives to improve research opportunities. However, President Obama does acknowledge the downside effects that this research can bring such as the risk of human cloning and addresses how it will be prevented. This speech will support an embryonic stem cell argumentative essay by demonstrating the benefits this research can bring to the country.
Late one night a woman is driving home on the freeway, she’s hit head on by a drunk driver and killed. The man is charged with two accounts of murder; the woman, and her four-week-old embryo inside her. By law, everyone human being is guaranteed rights of life; born or unborn they are equal. The same law should be enforced concerning human embryonic stem cell research. Dr. James A. Thomson discovered stem cells in 1998 and they’ve intrigued scientist ever since. The stem cells themselves are derived from a three to four day old cluster of cells called a blastocyst and they are so coveted because they are pluripotent, meaning they can differentiate into any type of cell in the human body. Although embryonic stem cells show amazing potential to cure various disease such as cancer, congestive heart failure, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, muscular dystrophies, and more. The methods by which they are obtained is controversial. Research on embryonic stem cells is unethical, unnecessary, and purely homicide.
...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?
Millions of people die every year from diseases and accidents; the nightly news is filled with reports about the devastating effects of cancer, horrific accidents, and disasters that leave people disfigured or paralyzed. Embryonic stem cell research is a part of biomedical science and has the potential to ease the suffering of sick people by curing diseases and defects, creating organs and tissue for patients needing transplants or skin grafts, regenerating axons in spinal cord injuries, and creating new treatments, drugs, and immunizations. However, America’s government does not support this research to an extent that would make a difference in medicine; only a few stem cell lines are authorized, and federal funding is minimal. The government should support embryonic stem cell research by educating the public, increasing federal funds, and easing restrictions.
Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that can differentiate themselves into specific cell type. There are two types of stem cells. The first one is the adult's stem cell. These stem cells can be found in various places in an adult human body, like the brain, the bone marrow or the liver. The other type of stem cells is the embryonic stem cells. These cells are found in embryos before its implantation in the mother's uterus. At this stage the embryo is divided in two types of cell. The first one is the outer cluster of cell that forms the embryo that will become part of the placenta once the embryo hatch. And the inner cluster is the source of embryonic stem cell since it consists of undifferentiated cell that will divide and differentiate to form all the organs and tissue needed in an adult organism. As stem cell are undifferentiated cell they can become whatever cell type is needed in an organism and could be the solution to diseases that are, at this date, incurable. (Medical News Today, 2013). Most of the ethic's problem of the stem cells researches come from the embryonic stem cell researches and how the cells are collected. Embryonic stem cells can be obtained in several ways. The first one is after a couple's fertility treatment, there might be some embryos left and the couple can decide to donate their embryos to research. The second option is to collect stem cells from a foetus after an abortion. And the last possibility is to use therapeutic cloning. Using an ovum from witch the nucleus was taken off and the nucleus of a somatic cell, the origin of this cell in the body doesn't matter, it can come from the skin for example, it is possible to create an embryo and get the stem cell from the created embryo. But in all of...
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 possibility to cure Alzheimer, Parkinson’s, AIDS, spinal injuries, and many more diseases and conditions is received by many in the medical world with excitement and anticipation. The discoveries of embryonic stem, ES, cells in 1998 by James A. Thomson, a biologist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, was a great breakthrough for the medical world, showing great promise in the field of stem cell research. This is because they have the capacity to become any type of cell tissue in the body. To the medical world the opportunities seems endless. However, there is a great deal of debate by some who question the moral and ethical use of ES cells, believing that life begins at fertilization. Supporters argue that we have an obligation to help others who are suffering by using ES cells, because they are consider potential life. The question is do we have the right to use ES cells for research purposes when the embryos will be grown specifically for research and destruction? And if so, should this research be funded by the government?
Embryonic cells should be allowed to be used because of the medical benefits they provide. They can be used to cure diseases such as Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, traumatic spinal cord injury, Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy, heart disease, and even vision and hearing loss (nih.gov 2009). There is no problem using them for medical purposes and it is not immoral to use them for this reason. Embryonic cells have the potential to save lives. Therefore, the usage of embryonic cells outweighs the ethical issues.
Stem cell research is becoming an issue that is one of the most profound of our time. The issue of research involving stem cells derived from human embryos is increasingly the subject of dinner table discussions and a national debate. The issue is confronted every day in laboratories as scientists ponder the ethical consequences of their work. It is agonized over by parents and many couples as they try to have children, or save children already born. The issue is debated within the church, with people of different faiths, even many of the same faith coming to different conclusions. Many people are finding that the more they know about stem cell research, the less certain they are about the right ethical and moral conclusions.
Within the past few years, scientist have made several breakthroughs with human stem cells. These breakthroughs have catapulted the issue of stem cell research into the middle of a national debate. Most people have no problem with the research itself, however the source of the stem cells (adult or human embryos) used in research is the primary cause of the debate. Some people feel that destroying an embryo is comparable to murder, even if the research it promotes may help people with serious illnesses. Other believe that an embryo is not a person and therefore research on an embryo is the same as research on any other group of cells.
There are people who enjoy the fact that they can use their own bone marrow and stem cells to treat themselves. There are many diseases and injuries that stem cells may be able to cure. Alone there are positive outcomes using stem cells, there stands debate on the use of embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells should be used to sustain life because they can rebuild organs despite the concerns.
Embryonic stem cell research has been known to put a big dent in government funding. However, with the use of embryonic stem cell research we would be able to find cures too many different types of diseases. Some feel that it is very important that this research should be funded so that we will have the chance to change the lives of many people and benefit everyone in the long run. (Mangus, 2004).
Embryonic stem cell research is, perhaps, one of the most divisive ethical issues of the millennium. These cells are thought by many to hold the cures for such diseases as diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, heart disease and even cancer. Some researchers believe that these cells could heal spinal cord injuries, allowing a once paralyzed man to walk again. Despite the numerous potential benefits, the issue is exceedingly controversial and has sparked much debate, primarily over one sole reason: embryonic stem cell research causes the destruction of an embryo. This debate can be epitomized into two questions: when does human life begin and what makes an organism human. The answers to these questions are usually opinionated and not backed
Stem cell research holds the potential for many exciting treatments applicable to pernicious diseases; diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, diabetes and spinal injury, that cause a loss of function of or total loss of cells. Nonetheless, few other areas of science have generated such an intriguing premise. Unrelenting debate over which fundamental principle is given precedence: the duty to value a human life or the duty to alleviate suffering. In Oklahoma, a recent decision on this ethical dilemma put a complete ban on stem cell research altogether. The legislation creates a felon out of researchers and embryo donors involved in the process. To make a decision such as this one must be in the right mindset and ask the right questions