Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Stem Cell Research Journal
My personal views on stem cell research are most closely represented by the opinions expressed by the Union of American Hebrew Congregations and the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Judaism believes in the concept of “pikuach nefesh”, the primary responsibility to save human life, which overrides almost all other laws. As a result of this, they believe that we should use all knowledge that is available to us to save human life, and part of this knowledge happens to be our ability to use embryonic stem cells to find new therapies for a wide range of serious human ailments. They believe that based on the current evidence that has been shown, the future of stem cell research is extremely promising and that it will be possible, with much further study to put an end to the suffering of people who are afflicted with such serious conditions as paralysis, Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, and many other horrible conditions. I agree very much with this point of view. I think that the primary goal of medicine should be to help relieve the patient’s suffering. There are many conditions that are prevalent in the medical world today and are striking more and more people each day and the tragic part is that doctors have no way of curing them. Now, however, there is a possibility that with embryonic stem cell research we can cure these horrible afflictions, and I think that we should pursue this opportunity and make every attempt possible to relieve the suffering of people around the world.
I also agree with what the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice has to say on this issue. They state, “We believe in the morality of the use of tissue derived from fetuses when the procurement of that tissue is carefully regulated.” They also say, “We also believe that fetal tissue donation is moral when the decision to use the tissue is made separately from the decision to abort. Women who have made informed decisions to donate fetal tissue for research deserve the respect and gratitude of society.” The RCRC believes that women should have the right to make their own choice about whether to donate their fetus’s tissue to stem cell research efforts. I am in agreement with this view because I believe that a woman should have the right to do what she wants with her body. I do not think that the government should restrict this right in any way shape or form. If a woman feels that she would like to donate her aborted fetus’s stem cells to science so that they can be used for research, then this is her right and no one should be able to inhibit her actions. It is not the place of a group of middle-aged men (i.e. the Unites States Congress) to be telling American women what they can and cannot do to their own bodies. I also believe that the RCRC is right to specify that the use of fetal tissue for research is moral when it is procured properly. I agree that it is not ethical to use tissue that was acquired by bribing the donor or taking it in other dishonest, deceitful ways. The mother must make her own decision to donate it, and no one else should either force her into the decision or provide incentives. If women were offered motivation to abort fetuses in the name of stem cell research, a very disturbing and unethical tissue market that exploited human lives could develop in this country and even around the world which would truly be a tragedy.
I think that the dividing line between what is ethical and what is not lies in the motives that are driving the research and the ultimate uses of the technology. As long as the knowledge gained by the research that is being done is used to help people, then the research can be considered ethical. However, the ultimate motives are not the only thing that is important in this case; the ends do not necessarily always justify the means in my opinion. Very careful steps must be taken to ensure that human rights are not abused. In my opinion, it is ok to use the stem cells as long as the embryo is not allowed to mature into a fetus or to be born. Within the first trimester, before the fetus possesses differentiated organs or resembles a human being, it is ok to remove the cells as I do not believe that this being is yet a human. After this point however, I do not think that it is ok to kill the fetus simply for the use of its stem cells. If a woman independently chooses to abort the pregnancy after this point, then that is her decision and it should be respected. There is a danger that once the fetus becomes a human being, its rights could be abused. Theoretically, once there is a greater knowledge of stem cells and how to use them, it will be possible to produce new organs for patients in need of them. If this ability is taken too far, it could result in the creation of human beings simply to exploit them and steal their organs to give to others who need them. This would be very wrong and extremely unethical in my opinion and steps will need to be taken in the future to ensure that if stem cells can indeed be used successfully for this purpose, this kind of abuse does not occur. Strict regulations by the government will most likely be needed to keep this from getting out of hand.
I think that the United States should be more supportive of stem cell research. This is a very promising field that can stand to benefit a large number of people if the technology can be perfected. However, this cannot happen unless our country provides funding to scientists so that they can do the research that is required to find out whether or not this will be able to help people. Many people argue that these programs should not be funded because there has not been enough evidence presented to prove that it will really help to improve people’s lives. In response to this, I would ask how one can make a statement such as that one when it has not even been given the chance to prove whether or not it can help people. Because of this, I think that the United States should start providing more funds for stem cell research in this country. This will allow scientists to determine if there are benefits to this technology. After this, I think that it will be necessary for the US government to impose strict regulations on the use of the technology to prevent it from being abused. It should only be able to be used for therapeutic purposes and should only be employ if there is a clearly demonstrated need by the patient (i.e. permission of the doctor and written permission). There will also need to be rigorous regulations on where the stem cells that are used for therapy come from. They must not be acquired from donors who were given other incentives to donate the tissue (i.e. money) or were forced to do so by an outside influence. This will help to prevent abuse of human rights and exploitation of tissues.
I also agree with what the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice has to say on this issue. They state, “We believe in the morality of the use of tissue derived from fetuses when the procurement of that tissue is carefully regulated.” They also say, “We also believe that fetal tissue donation is moral when the decision to use the tissue is made separately from the decision to abort. Women who have made informed decisions to donate fetal tissue for research deserve the respect and gratitude of society.” The RCRC believes that women should have the right to make their own choice about whether to donate their fetus’s tissue to stem cell research efforts. I am in agreement with this view because I believe that a woman should have the right to do what she wants with her body. I do not think that the government should restrict this right in any way shape or form. If a woman feels that she would like to donate her aborted fetus’s stem cells to science so that they can be used for research, then this is her right and no one should be able to inhibit her actions. It is not the place of a group of middle-aged men (i.e. the Unites States Congress) to be telling American women what they can and cannot do to their own bodies. I also believe that the RCRC is right to specify that the use of fetal tissue for research is moral when it is procured properly. I agree that it is not ethical to use tissue that was acquired by bribing the donor or taking it in other dishonest, deceitful ways. The mother must make her own decision to donate it, and no one else should either force her into the decision or provide incentives. If women were offered motivation to abort fetuses in the name of stem cell research, a very disturbing and unethical tissue market that exploited human lives could develop in this country and even around the world which would truly be a tragedy.
I think that the dividing line between what is ethical and what is not lies in the motives that are driving the research and the ultimate uses of the technology. As long as the knowledge gained by the research that is being done is used to help people, then the research can be considered ethical. However, the ultimate motives are not the only thing that is important in this case; the ends do not necessarily always justify the means in my opinion. Very careful steps must be taken to ensure that human rights are not abused. In my opinion, it is ok to use the stem cells as long as the embryo is not allowed to mature into a fetus or to be born. Within the first trimester, before the fetus possesses differentiated organs or resembles a human being, it is ok to remove the cells as I do not believe that this being is yet a human. After this point however, I do not think that it is ok to kill the fetus simply for the use of its stem cells. If a woman independently chooses to abort the pregnancy after this point, then that is her decision and it should be respected. There is a danger that once the fetus becomes a human being, its rights could be abused. Theoretically, once there is a greater knowledge of stem cells and how to use them, it will be possible to produce new organs for patients in need of them. If this ability is taken too far, it could result in the creation of human beings simply to exploit them and steal their organs to give to others who need them. This would be very wrong and extremely unethical in my opinion and steps will need to be taken in the future to ensure that if stem cells can indeed be used successfully for this purpose, this kind of abuse does not occur. Strict regulations by the government will most likely be needed to keep this from getting out of hand.
I think that the United States should be more supportive of stem cell research. This is a very promising field that can stand to benefit a large number of people if the technology can be perfected. However, this cannot happen unless our country provides funding to scientists so that they can do the research that is required to find out whether or not this will be able to help people. Many people argue that these programs should not be funded because there has not been enough evidence presented to prove that it will really help to improve people’s lives. In response to this, I would ask how one can make a statement such as that one when it has not even been given the chance to prove whether or not it can help people. Because of this, I think that the United States should start providing more funds for stem cell research in this country. This will allow scientists to determine if there are benefits to this technology. After this, I think that it will be necessary for the US government to impose strict regulations on the use of the technology to prevent it from being abused. It should only be able to be used for therapeutic purposes and should only be employ if there is a clearly demonstrated need by the patient (i.e. permission of the doctor and written permission). There will also need to be rigorous regulations on where the stem cells that are used for therapy come from. They must not be acquired from donors who were given other incentives to donate the tissue (i.e. money) or were forced to do so by an outside influence. This will help to prevent abuse of human rights and exploitation of tissues.
Comments:
<< Home
I agree with your position, and perhaps a comment on the idea of funding. Maybe we should, instead of funding specific entities who do stem-cell research, offer demand-side incentives like eliminating sales tax on stem cell research-derived drugs or practices.
Post a Comment
<< Home
