Thursday, December 08, 2005
Embryonic Stem Cells
When regarding embryonic stem cell research, I would not consider my opinions to be completely mainstream, but not too radical either. I believe that general stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, in vitro maturation, and SCNT (therapeutic cloning) are all morally acceptable as well as promising as solutions to problems yet incurable in the medical world. According to the first article we were given to read, “The aim of stem cell research is to determine how to create specific tissues.” All the procedures listed above involving using these tissues in order to better people’s lives by finding cures to diseases that were once thought of as invincible. Cancer, AIDS, and Alzheimer’s are all within the grasp of stem cells to cure, but moral and financial problems continually hold them back.
Morally, I have to draw the line at reproductive cloning, in which an actual human being could be cloned. Therapeutic cloning, which involves stem cells that are not “adult” seems okay to me, as the benefits clearly outweigh the moral issues. Not only can this method help to save lives, but it can also help to create them for infertile couples wishing to have a child. Reproductive cloning, however, gives too much power to those who could literally build a human being. I would like to think that scientists would have equivalent moral judgment and be able to draw the line there.
After morality, funding is the main obstacle in the way of stem cell research. Recently, President Bush assigned federal funding only to projects working with an original batch of stem cells. But these cells, in the eyes of scientists, are not enough to effectively advance the field far enough to actually obtain results. I feel that it is not the responsibility of the government, but that of non-governmental organizations to fund this research. Such organizations exist all over the United States, and the funding is there to be had. Once a significant advance comes along in the field of stem cells, I think that it will be much easier to find the money. The American people react to results, and those are sure to come eventually from the embryonic stem cell community. The American government should encourage such research and let it continue, but they have a limited budget that does not need the added strain of this research.
Ethically speaking, I would not personally consider an embryo to be a human being. I would consider something to be “alive” when it knows it is alive. That is to say, something is living when it can recognize and react to stimulus around it. Whether this point is found in the womb or out of it, I consider it a fair assertion regarding what is living and what is not. Therefore, I would align myself most closely with the opinions of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, who deem the use of aborted or therapeutic embryonic stem cells acceptable when they are used for “purposes of life-saving or life-enhancing research and treatment.” Highly conservative religious groups would obviously be the most likely to oppose my position on stem cells because they believe that a fetus is a human and using it would therefore be immoral.
My attitude concerning this issue doesn’t come from any certain belief system or specific encouragement, but I have, like many others, watched loved ones die of diseases such as cancer. I want us to find a cure for such diseases and I feel that embryonic stem cell research is one feasible way of doing so.
Morally, I have to draw the line at reproductive cloning, in which an actual human being could be cloned. Therapeutic cloning, which involves stem cells that are not “adult” seems okay to me, as the benefits clearly outweigh the moral issues. Not only can this method help to save lives, but it can also help to create them for infertile couples wishing to have a child. Reproductive cloning, however, gives too much power to those who could literally build a human being. I would like to think that scientists would have equivalent moral judgment and be able to draw the line there.
After morality, funding is the main obstacle in the way of stem cell research. Recently, President Bush assigned federal funding only to projects working with an original batch of stem cells. But these cells, in the eyes of scientists, are not enough to effectively advance the field far enough to actually obtain results. I feel that it is not the responsibility of the government, but that of non-governmental organizations to fund this research. Such organizations exist all over the United States, and the funding is there to be had. Once a significant advance comes along in the field of stem cells, I think that it will be much easier to find the money. The American people react to results, and those are sure to come eventually from the embryonic stem cell community. The American government should encourage such research and let it continue, but they have a limited budget that does not need the added strain of this research.
Ethically speaking, I would not personally consider an embryo to be a human being. I would consider something to be “alive” when it knows it is alive. That is to say, something is living when it can recognize and react to stimulus around it. Whether this point is found in the womb or out of it, I consider it a fair assertion regarding what is living and what is not. Therefore, I would align myself most closely with the opinions of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, who deem the use of aborted or therapeutic embryonic stem cells acceptable when they are used for “purposes of life-saving or life-enhancing research and treatment.” Highly conservative religious groups would obviously be the most likely to oppose my position on stem cells because they believe that a fetus is a human and using it would therefore be immoral.
My attitude concerning this issue doesn’t come from any certain belief system or specific encouragement, but I have, like many others, watched loved ones die of diseases such as cancer. I want us to find a cure for such diseases and I feel that embryonic stem cell research is one feasible way of doing so.
Comments:
<< Home
I would have to disagree with you about the government funding of embryonic stem cell research. At this time, none of the allowed stem cell lines are able to be used. This puts researchers at a great disadvantage and creates a problem. In order to further testing, researchers should be using stem cell lines that have the potential to be used and are not contaiminated. Yes, it is also up to private organizations to fund such research, but I do not believe they should carry all the weight.
Post a Comment
<< Home
