Running head: Ethical Aspects of Stem Cell Research

Ethical Aspects of Stem Cell Research

Name:

Institution:

Course:

Tutor:

Date:

Ethical Aspects of Stem Cell Research

The ability to effectively resolve emergent ethical concerns acts as one of the key factors in determining sustainable living. Twenty first century ethical dilemmas have intensified owing to the fast changing lifestyles and consumerism patterns based on global demands. Their complexity has also increased significantly and as such, scholars in ethics have differed sharply in the past over the most sustainable solutions to the dilemmas. One such dilemma is related to the issue of stem cell research. This paper provides a holistic evaluation of ethical concerns that have increasingly compounded this area of research.

Numerous studies of whom Walters (2004) is represented ascertain that ethical concerns relating to stem cell research emanate from the origin and the utilization of the cells rather than their importance and effectiveness. In this respect, it is indicated that the researchers usually get their specimen from dead embryos. This according to Mertes and Pennings (2007) is referred to as embryonic stem cell research. Also, the necessary cells can be obtained through the process of somatic cell nuclear transfer. This is commonly known as cloning and it entails removal of an egg nucleus and replacement of the same with a mature body cell. Finally, the desirable stem cells are also sourced from adults. Usually, these cells are obtained from the umbilical cord and bone marrows.

Various ethical concerns that have had far reaching implications on religion and policy implementation have been raised since the inception of the procedure. While some individuals contend that the process is important in saving lives and reducing pain and suffering, some argue that this is attained at the expense of the lives of other individuals. Yet some assume a liberal position and justify the employment of the same in certain situations.

Proponents of stem cell research base their arguments on the moral standing of the embryos. In particular, they contend that the embryos do not have similar moral relevance as the individuals who could need their cells for reduction of pain and suffering. This is because of the fact that they do not have vital capacities that constitute a moral being. For instance, Bjuresten and Outi (2003) cite that they lack the fundamental power to reason, do not have the capacity to feel pain and are usually unconscious. Furthermore, they postulate that perceiving embryos as moral beings can have adverse effects on current fertility treatments because they entail creating extra embryos as well as disposing them. From a religious standpoint, these proponents ascertain that a fertilized egg that is living in isolation can not be considered a moral being. As such, it does not need to be accorded similar treatment as human beings. It is in this consideration that they justify cell stem research on the premise that morally, it furthers the good of reducing pain and suffering and enhance a great degree of happiness for a significant percentage of the population.

In contrast, opponents of the procedure base their arguments on the origins of the cells and their utilization in achieving relative goals. In this regard, Camporesi and Boniolo (2008) indicate that in some instances, the cells are obtained from dead embryos. This according to the opponents amounts to murder and hence immorality. This conception is complemented by religious viewpoints that argue that since the lives of the embryos are determinate, it is considered killing. Essentially, removal of the required cells leads to death of the embryo. At this juncture, it is worth acknowledging that the religion is a vital source of moral values and principles that provide guidance in the society.

Further, stem cell research has also been considered unethical because of its presumed promotion of abortion in women. This contention stems from the recognition that some researches source their embryonic cells from fetus that are aborted by women. Classic examples in this regard are the scientists at John Hopkins Hospitals who reportedly get their cells from fetus that are obtained through elective abortion (Mertes & Pennigs (2007). Basically, abortion is an issue that has had various ethical, social and medical controversies since time immemorial. Morally, the process is considered to lead to both physical and mental suffering. Most importantly, it has been implicated for loss of life and reduction of the person’s level of happiness. From a social viewpoint, abortion has been cited to contribute significantly to guilt, mental torture and hopelessness. Medical implications constitute critical side effects such as excessive bleeding and infertility.

In addition, cloning has also been a bone of contenting as it is considered to have significant moral concerns. Fundamentally, this allows scientists to obtain essential cells and use the same in treating various conditions that could have grave impacts on the life of an individual. As such, it promotes the development of human life through research. Ethical concerns in this regard are associated with its possibility of creating life threatening genes. This in return puts in danger numerous lives when such genes are introduced in the environment.

A more tolerant position justifies extraction of vital cells from embryos whose lives are in danger. In this respect, they argue that in the long run, such embryos would be discarded altogether. In addition, advocates of this conception indicate that stem cell research should only be employed for beneficial purposes. In this respect, it is argued that some cells are extracted, stored for long periods of time and finally disposed without being used. This according to Walters (2004) is unethical because of the fact that lives of the embryos are destroyed without saving other lives or reducing pain or/and suffering. This perception also argues that the required cells can be easily obtained from adults as opposed to the embryos. This would ensure that no lives are lost but numerous are saved. Comparatively, the pain of extracting the cells is less than the advantages of saving lives. However, the viability of this option is still under review as adult cells are non versatile and therefore less effective that the embryonic cells.

In conclusion, from the review, it is certain that stem cell research is still compounded by ethical concerns that need to be addressed accordingly. While it is considered a major break through in the medical field, its effective application has been undermined by the emergent ethical issues. Indeed, its effectiveness in reducing pain and suffering can not be disputed. However, it is also clear than numerous ‘other’ lives are lost in this process. Notably, future research needs to focus on reconciling the differences in order to attain a middle ground that would be acceptable by all parties in the social, ethical, medical and religious sphere.

References

Bjuresten, K. & Outi, H (2003). Donation of Embryos. Human Reproduction, 18 (5), 1350-66.

Camporesi, S. & Boniolo, G. (2008). Ethics of Cytoplasmic Hybrid Embryo Research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 520-26.

Mertes, H. & Pennings, G. (2007). Ethics of Oocyte Donation. Human Reproduction, 22, 1360-66.

Walters, R. (2004). Stem Cell Research: An Ethical Viewpoint. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 13 (1), 3-4.