Stem Cells 201: An Overview of the Ethics of Stem Cell Research

Abstract

championed by scientists as the key to curing such diseases as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, reducing the neurological devastation of stroke and spinal cord injury, and eradicating juvenile diabetes, among many others. However, controversy surrounding the practice of using embryos for research purposes has kept government funding of stem cell research from being a foregone conclusion. The ethical decisions that drive policy tend to initially hang on the question of the moral status of an embryo. Views on the moral ramifications of harvesting embryos for research purposes are wide ranging and tend to be informed by theology and social ideology. Does the embryo have the same rights as a person? Groups who believe that the embryo has the same rights as a child or an adult argue that the destruction of embryos is morally wrong and that the use of embryos in research is unjustified no matter how great the potential therapeutic benefit of stem cell research. However, there are other groups that view the embryo as a form of human life that, while worthy of respect, is not the moral equivalent of a person. Once the embryo is granted an intermediate moral status that allows its destruction for the attainment of a greater good, the ethical discussion then shifts to the moral parameters of stem cell research. How does one proceed with stem cell research in an ethical manner? Questions of research protocol, acceptable sources of embryos for stem cells, and the just allocation of the fruits of stem cell research take on more weight as the ethicists and policy makers strive to balance the potential moral good of curing disease and alleviating human suffering with the potential moral pitfalls of destroying one form of human life to benefit another. Should one proceed with stem cell research at all? There are some in the disability community who feel that the funding of stem cell research in the name of eradicating disability would be a misappropriation of federal funding. When so many people live with disabilities every day and lack federal funding or political support for programs that would increase quality of life now, many feel that it would be unconscionable to focus on a cure to the exclusion of all else.