1

Ethics of Stem Cell Research

The Ethics of Stem Cell Research

Leah Goodwin

Axia College of University of Phoenix

COM 120

Melissa Gray

Week 9 Day 7

1
 2

The ethical issues regarding Stem Cell Research will always be controversial. The

principal argument is between two powerful and persuasive factions of our society: religion and

science. Both have strong opinions on this issue with voices that resonate throughout the world.

Add a touch of politics and federal funding, the debate is off and running. The catalyst of the

stem cell debate is the method in which embryonic stem cells are secured

The foundation of every argument appears to start with the complex question of: “when

does life begin?” There is a wide range of opinions on this theory, each with credible evidence.

Whether it is based on individual interpretations of the bible and other religious teachings, or

scientific studies dating before Darwin’s theory of evolution, each side has specific definitions

for the beginning of human life. Society tells us that we must base our own conclusions on one

side or the other and that there is no middle of the road. It is not common to find the marriage of

both schools of thought. However, a compromise must be met in order to move forward and

establish criteria for ethical stem cell research. Perhaps the key to compromise is a clear

understanding of the process.

What is a stem cell? Stem cells are original cells that divide an indefinite number of times

creating several cell types that then have the potential to become an organism. The formation of

a stem cell begins within three to four days after fertilization. Once fertilized a cluster of cells

form a blastocyst. Stem cells can be extracted from the inner cell of the blastocyst.. These cells

are known as embryonic and have the capacity to develop into any of the hundreds of organisms

in the body such as heart, skin, and nerve cells. This regeneration has shown promise in the

treatment and cure of diseases such as Cancer, Parkinson’s Disease, Diabeties, brain and spinal

injuries and Multiple Sclerosis. No other research has given as much hope to those who live with

2
 3

no expectation of a cure as with the study of stem cells. So why is there so much controversy

over using stem cells when it can save the lives of so many people?

Over past several years, there has been controversy surrounding stem cell research.

Members of Congress and the Senate have placed bills on the desks of former President Bill

Clinton, and President George W. Bush, only to be vetoed. The majority of the funding for stem

cell research by biotechnology companies is through private donations. Because of limited

funding resources these companies are asking the United States Government to pay for their

research stating that the benefits are available to millions of people. President Bush vetoed the

legislation on this technology stating, “This bill would support the taking of innocent human life

in the hopes of finding medical benefits for others, it crosses a moral boundary that our decent

society needs to respect, so I vetoed it” (Kean), a sentiment shared by religious and right to life

groups worldwide. As a result there are hundreds of thousands of embryos in storage that are

unusable because President Bush has put certain restrictions on the research of stem cells. The

cure for countless diseases and disorders depend on these and future stem cells. One must

understand that without taking risks there is no chance for discovery, and the discovery of new

stem cell information could mean the enhancement of countless lives.

Opponents of stem cell research tell us that the destruction of human embryo is morally

wrong no matter the benefits. The majority of religious sects believe that human life begins at

the moment of conception. The space in time when the egg and sperm are united is the

beginning of life according to many people worldwide. Extensive research has not found

documentation that cited a direct quote from any religious document that has stated this, but it is

a widely accepted hypothesis. Many believe that to tread on such a sacred miracle would be

3
 4

going against God’s divine plan. To destroy or manipulate the human life in any way is not

condoned in many of these circles.

This argument is strong in merit and should be considered when debating this issue.

However, with all arguments, there are opposing views that must be considered.

At present there are hundreds of diseases that will benefit from stem cell research.

Debilitating diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, can utilize stem cells to

repair worn out cartilage. Heart disease patients can benefit as stem cells produce cardiac tissue

to replace damaged arteries. Burn victims can have skin cells reproduce themselves rather than

going through painful skin grafts.. Nerve cells will grow and replace brain tissue destroyed by

diseases and disorders such as strokes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Lou Gehrig’s, and spinal cord

injuries. Nerve cells also have the potential to create pancreatic cells for people who suffer from

diabetes. Since the body cannot survive without blood cells, stem cells could be used to restore a

person’s blood system with red and white cells after he or she has undergone cancer treatments.

This is also true for the deadly HIV virus or AIDS. Scientists could create a CD-4 cell found in

the immune system when the HIV kills these cells. Embryonic stem cells have shown promising

results when tested on mice. In one case at the University of California, a mouse that could not

lift his tail due to a spinal cord injury was injected with embryonic stem cells and regained

mobility (wired news). It is experiments like this one that give patients with debilitating diseases

and injuries hope. With all of its promises of treatments and cures there is still the question of

moral and ethical values when it comes to extracting stem cells from embryos. Are we

promoting the destruction of a human life? Where do we go from here?

Scientist found alternatives to how stem cells can be successfully extracted from a living

embryo. Rather than obtaining the cells from an in-womb fetus, an embryo can be created

4
 5

outside of the woman. Though controversy still plagues such a technique it is a solution that

could marry both sides of the isle.

When a couple cannot conceive children, they resort to in-vitro fertilization. During this

process, an artificial environment is prepared for ten or more embryos of which only three or

four are implanted into the mother. The extra embryos can be handled in two ways. They may be

frozen, which comes with the risk of the embryos dying anyway, or they may be discarded

altogether. The late Christopher Reeve stated “The issue is not about ethics. You really don't

have an ethical problem because you're actually saving lives by using cells that are going to the

garbage," He continues, "I just don't see how that's immoral or unethical. I really don't. The

solution to the problem is to donate the excess embryos to scientific research.” (Cnn.com).

A very radical view supporting the use of manufactured embryos was stated by Bonnie

Steinbock. “Since the embryos are killed when the cells are removed, people who support Pro

Life view the cell removal as murder. Most of these embryos will actually never become a

person and some do not even have the ability to do so. Despite their claims, one must realize that

these embryos have no brain, central nervous system, mouth, heart, lungs, or other internal

organs. They cannot see, hear, touch, or taste and have absolutely no consciousness. Early

embryos, indeed early-gestation fetuses, have no consciousness, no awareness, no experiences of

any kind, even the most rudimentary. Without even the precursor of a nervous system, pre-

implantation embryos cannot possibly have any kind of consciousness” (Steinbock). This set a

fire under most Pro-Life organizations and a set back for the scientific world. In order to counter

act such negative publicity it was back to the drawing board in hopes of finding less

controversial ways of obtaining stem cells. The ethics issue was finding common ground for all

involved.

5
 6

Adult stem cells are now being more thoroughly researched in hopes of eliminating the

moral issues associated with embryonic stem cells. It was once believed that by birth the ability

of the cells to give rise to every tissue was lost. New research has shown how fatuous such a

view was. Countless cells in children and adults have the ability to give rise to a variety of cell

types when put in a specific environment. This may seem like a perfect solution to end the stem

cell controversy, but one must understand the drawbacks of using adult stem cells in comparison

to embryonic cells. Adult stem cells only have the ability to generate into a few types of tissue

and are hard to separate and extract from the surrounding cells. Embryonic stem cells are easily

extracted and have the potential to develop into any one of the types of body tissue. This is the

reason scientists are fighting for the funding and continuing of stem cell research. They feel that

with the knowledge they already have about stem cells and further research, they could possibly

change the quality of life for hundreds of thousands.

Many potential advantages can be gained from stem cell research. Scientists are on the

brink of making life-changing discoveries, but are being slowed down due to the restrictions put

on their research. Researchers may use stem cells to explain why we have some cells that grow

and function normally and other which become unhealthy and die. Stem cells are also being used

to test new medicines. Scientists are able to test medicines on cell lines to determine which one

has the most advantageous effects, therefore enabling faster and more efficient drug

development. Even though the public has been unable to see many stem cell discoveries due to

the controversy involved, one must realize that advances are being made. In other countries such

as Canada and China where laws on research are not as strict, numerous discoveries have been

made. We must encourage the continuing of stem cell research so that we can begin to reap the

benefits.

6
 7

Although stem cell research has been considered unethical for numerous reasons,

continuing research will prove to be beneficial in the future. Stem cell research, although

debatable to many individuals, is extremely important to the future of our medical world. Stem

cells may unlock the key to curing a myriad of diseases millions of people die from each year.

Restricting research funding now will only delay the betterment of lives. Since the discovery of

the first stem cell in 1998, stem cell research has been considered the biggest medical

breakthrough in decades. Stem cell research has gained more potential over the years and may

supply a cure for some of the world’s most deadly diseases.

7
 8

References

Cohen, Elizabeth. “Reeve: Fund Embryonic Stem Cell Research” CNN.Com. Posted on 17 July

Acessed on 27 March 2007

Kean, Sam. "Bush Vetoes Bill to Loosen Policy on Stem-Cell Research. (George W. Bush)." The

Chronicle of Higher Education 52.47 (July 28, 2006): NA. Expanded Academic ASAP.

Thomson Gale. Central Arizona College. 11 Oct. 2006

Philipkoski, Kristen, “Mouse's Tail of Stem Cell Success” Wired News, Published on 11 March

2002, viewed on 30 March 2007

Robinson, B.A. “Human Stem Cells”, Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, Copyright

1998 to 2004 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance Last updated 2004-Oct_15

Accessed on 29 March 2007

Steinbock, Bonnie. "The morality of killing human embryos.(Defining the Beginning and the

End of Human Life: Implications for Ethics, Policy and Law)." Journal of Law, Medicine &

Ethics 34.1 (Spring 2006): 26(9). Expanded Academic ASAP Thomson Gale Central Arizona

College. 26 Sep. 2006

8
9