Abstract

Studies over the past decade have shown that stem cell research has clearly opened up a breakthrough in possibilities for treating people with a myriad of serious and chronic diseases. Even though the benefits to such research seem boundless, the disadvantages of obtaining these stem cells weigh heavily on critics’ minds. Specifically, embryonic stem cell research has sparked a debate of intense ethical concerns. These debates demand a clarification of the status of the human embryo. Do these undeveloped fetuses deserve the same rights as a living human being? Scientists are now working to expand past these debates by continuing to search for other methods of harvesting human embryonic stem cells without the potential of affecting a “human life.” Also, research has recently uncovered the potential for other stem cells that have similar benefits but are not obtained using human embryos.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research:

The Ethics Surrounding the Debate

        As biotechnology and research on stem cells continue to make advances, many controversial issues within these fields are rising to the forefront of concern for the majority of modern Americans. Although it is apparent that stem cells will hopefully be used to treat people with a variety of conditions including diseases such as Alzheimer’s and rheumatoid arthritis, many skeptics believe that the research surrounding these advances with human embryonic stem cells (ESCs) is morally and ethically wrong (Stem Cell 2008). One of the key ethical debates surrounding human ESC research involves defining the point at which “life” actually begins for a human being. Another concern revolves around whether or not embryos are being “killed” in order to remove the crucial stem cells. The proponents state that the medical benefits outweigh any side effects from tampering with the human embryonic stem cells and argue that the embryos are not yet humans; however, the opponents argue that these embryos should be recognized as human beings. The opponents also state that the “possible” advances do not overcome the ethics of “destroying” a human life and argue that there are simply too many medical risks associated with treatment using the stem cells derived from embryos (Monroe, Miller, & Tobis 2008).

Advocates for Research

        The United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) implies that stem cells hold many promises for unlocking life-saving secrets of the cell because of two distinct characteristics: 1) they give rise to different kinds of tissues in the body, and 2) they are “self-renewing” in the body and in the laboratory so that large quantities can be produced for medical purposes (Stem Cell 2008). From the standpoint of one researcher, ESCs are in many ways the ultimate stem cell for scientists. These specific cells are capable of becoming almost any type of cell or tissue and are easy to isolate and grow in the laboratory which can be crucial in cell-based regenerative therapy (Peters 2007).

Scientific Reasonings

        According to Richard Mollard, Ph.D., an embryonic stem cell specialist, ESCs are harvested from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst produced from in vitro fertilization and are generally extracted from unwanted, surplus embryos commonly created during medical procedures at these fertility clinics (Mollard 2005). The NIH states that stem cells “are not derived from eggs fertilized in a woman’s body.” Also, in order to donate these embryos to research, consent must be given by the donors (Stem Cell 2008).                                                                                                                  

Join now!

        Dr. Mollard also outlines the process of embryonic development: at four to six days old, the human fertilized egg grows into a mass of cells called a blastocyst. The blastocyst continues through many embryonic stages before physically developing into a fetus. During fertility procedures, more eggs are fertilized than necessary and “those blastocysts that are not implanted for pregnancy are usually frozen for future use by the couple who produced them, or are ultimately discarded.”  The author implies that it would be better to make use of these embryos rather than simply having them “thrown away” (Mollard 2005).

Moral ...

This is a preview of the whole essay