Biomedical Ethics Issues - Essay Example

and Number Bio- "LOGICAL" Warfare! Thesis ment: Biomedical research should find a constructive critic in the face of Ethical dignitaries to give an impetus in the process of improving quality of human life through advance in technology rather than being impeded by it. A: 'Congenital Birth Defects reduced by a significant percentage. Situation only to improve in near future.' 'The most common stress induced Heart Attacks scientifically known as Myocardial infarction has now a completely recoverable cure.' 'Alzheimer's and Parkinson's on the verge of eradication' A': "Human synthesis factory exposed" "Parents discard offspring's with undesirable traits. Fetal stem cell trade on the rise." "Mass unrest over speculations of Totalitarian eugenic army camp. Wounds of the Nazi terror era refreshed." Both sets A and A' above could well be the headlines of newspapers in decades not far from now. First characterized by benevolence, second exactly by the opposite. What demarcates the two A Clich yet true: Choice. Who and what ensures the right choice is the topic to be explored here. Philosophy has long striven to provide lucid reliefs to calm down disturbed souls over the nature of the world that it is turning out to be. Traditionally ethics followed two major schools. Utilitarianism, majorly propagated by John Stuart Mill & Jeremy Bentham, suggested that what is moral is what leads to happiness or pleasure. The principle of utility is sometimes summarized as "the greatest good for the greatest number." (Mark Kuczewski, "Methods of Traditionally Applied Philosophy: Utilitarianism") Of course the "pleasure" in principle here should not be confused with hedonism. Utilitarian approach deflates hedonism itself by believing that simple, moderate living is more "conducive" than vanity affairs. The other school rang the bell of Deontology. Majorly propagated by Immanuel Kant & John Rawls, the essence is well compressed in the line "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." (Mark Kuczewski, "Traditionally Applied Philosophy:Deontology") However these theories are just general in approach and provide a bird's eye view of reality. Snake venom is used as its own antidote. Dynamites are used to blast human beings in wars and also mountains to build roads alike What is "utility" then Poison or medicine Destruction or construction At instances such as these intuitively correct responses are gone along with and either side can be justified by mere play of words. Hence Philosophy needs a definitive, disciplined approach to strike out contradictions and lay down absolutes. One has to formulate a modus operandi. This would be best illustrated with the case study of interest. Consider the controversy over the use of stem cells in regenerative therapy. Ask: What is the exact debate about Here it is not whether stem cells should be used or not. It's whether: Argument 1: Why should Stem cells be harvested from blastocysts which are 3-5 days old embryos when adult stem cells are an option It is extremely essentially to clearly outline the question of conflict. Nothing and nothing but hard core facts should suffice then. Define clearly the terminologies involved and supplement with facts and figures. So what exactly are stem cells Stem cells are distinguished from other cell types by two important characteristics. First, they are unspecialized cells capable of renewing themselves through cell division, sometimes after long periods of inactivity. Second, under certain physiologic or experimental conditions, they can be induced to become tissue- or organ-specific cells with special functions. There are two types of stem cells: Embryonic Stem Cells: Embryonic stem cells-Primitive (undifferentiated) cells derived from a 5-day preimplantation embryo that are capable of dividing without differentiating for a prolonged period in culture, and are known to develop into cells and tissues of the three primary germ layers. (NIH, Glossary) Somatic (adult) stem cells-A relatively rare undifferentiated cell found in many organs and differentiated tissues with a limited capacity for both self renewal (in the laboratory) and differentiation. Such cells vary in their differentiation capacity, but it is usually limited to cell types in the organ of origin. This is an active area of investigation. (NIH Glossary) Now going back to the question of interest is why go to a morally taxing state of affairs harvesting stem cells from young embryos at all The answer is because adult stem cells are not totipotent. That is these cells are limited in ability to give rise to cells of their lineage only. That is red blood cell forming hematopoietic stem cells shall give rise to themselves only and none other. Thus their function is important yet nevertheless reduced to repair. Moreover all parts of the body do not generate these adult stem cells either. Also adult stem cells are more prone to differentiation as compared to embryonic stem cells thus reducing viable useful shelf life. Besides the technical justifications, it is also believed that imposing legal restrictions on stem cell research has resulted in America lagging behind the rest of the world in research. U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah commenting on President Bush's veto of federal funding for stem cell research using human embryos, CBS News Sunday Morning with Charles Osgood said, "I understand that many have ethical and moral reservations about stem cell research, but for the same reason I describe myself as pro-life, I embrace embryonic stem cell research because I believe being pro-life is not only caring for the unborn but also caring for the living." Counter Argument 1 American Talk show host Conan'O'Brien quotes, "In a prime-time address, President Bush said he backed limited federal funding for stem cell research. That's right, the President said, this is a quote, the research could help cure brain diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and whatever it is I have." In the chapter, "The Bush Policy and Its Unreasonable Critics", it is mentioned that almost one third of the publications published worldwide in the area of embryonic stem cell research in 2002 were from America which increases seven times in 2004. Also in the larger overall picture of stem cell research 42% of publications came from United States, with their nearest competitor Germany accounting only for 10%. Also only 14% of the total publications happened to comprise of cell lines banned by the NIH in Bush policy. How then is America lagging behind Why then venture into a territory to play mischief with precursors of human life Also, all said and done, after all hype and hoopla it needs to be factually documented as to whether Stem Cell research has been up to the expectations or not Restoring Argument 1: As for the total percentage of publications, it is clearly mentioned that one third of the total publications were American, whereas in 2004 that dropped to one quarter. Thus effectively the proportion has dropped. Also over the 14% issue; fire wouldn't have been discovered had the cavemen stuck to a particular type of stone. It had to involve experimenting with all the available materials to finally land on flints. Columbus wouldn't discover America had he stuck to the notion that earth was flat. All in all, the recent move by Obama to revoke the 2001 Bill by Bush has left no further use to discussing the Bush policy "milk", whether spilt or not. As for the playing mischief with life concern, these blastocysts are produced in vitro(in glass petri dishes!), not by the natural biological mechanism. They are mostly harvested from the excessive stock produced in In Vitro Fertility Clinics. They do have an unrealized potential to life. However these are I reinforce again, not biological embryos. They are to perish anyways, as the In Vitro Fertilization procedure involves multiple copies being synthesized by default, better so would be by doing good in the process. This is as simple a scenario as a pledge to eye donation after one's death. Now, the question whether culturing the blastocysts purely to harvest them for stem cells baffles and causes unrest in me. Well, what would you and logos then say to culturing "food animals" only to slaughter and butcher them for food later I am a vegetarian! Puns apart here is where legislation comes in the picture. Because, and I quote, along with Beneficence and autonomy in the landmark text Principles of Biomedical Ethics in the same year as the Belmont Report (1979), non maleficience and Justice form the other two pillars of the foundation on which bioethics is laid. Hence monitoring, regulation and legislation should be meticulously and objectively articulated to supplement the ongoing research activities. The recent move by Obama to revoke the 2001 Bill by Bush have left no further use to discussing the Bush policy "milk", whether spilt or not. Argument 2: On similar lines as above, is Abortion and justified Abortion is essentially carried out when the baby poses some medical threat to the mother, or is suffering from some lethal disorder as also in cases of "unwanted" instances. Many anti abortion protagonists would again strike a sensitive nerve pledging logos. However, if God has granted her the capacity to conceive, He has also given onto her the freedom of decision making for it. Abortion is never performed casually! Would any anti abortion exponent come forth and take responsibility for the yet to be born kid, to raise him providing all the economical and social assistance, with due love and nurturing Why blaspheme for honesty Says Edward Abbey, "Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State." Counter Argument 2: I also agree where George in his chapter, "Ethics, Politics and Genetic Knowledge" puts forth that Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis is increasingly instilling the eugenic approach choosing embryos based on "quality" as to which embryo is "more" worthy of living. This is akin to a production factory as to which stock is higher grade. Moreover eugenic abortions and even infanticides are making clear the fact that parental choice formed social pressures are taking society on a path where not far will it be as Bentley Glass grimly says that "No parent will have a right to burden society with a malformed or mentally incompetent child." This violates the very tenets of justice and fidelity! I am 5'3" in height. It gives me jitters to think, had my parents tested some neighboring embryos along with me and found one with 5'6" height, dreamt of a beauty queen and discarded me! Every single moment that I have lived till date and experienced would be non-existent! "I've noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born". (Reagan, New York Times) Restoring Argument 2: I agree that genetic testing should be limited to the essential medico legal valid instances and law and order have an important role to maintain harmony in these respects. Well if all the above was a little too heavy for the brain, lets just look deeper into it and see how far it has gone Let me scan your brain and determine whether you agree with me or not! Argument 3: Is Neural scanning a permissible technology To what extent "Some of that is extremely desirable, because it will help with diagnosis, education and so on, but we need to be thinking the ethical issues through. It adds a whole new gloss to personal medical data and how it might be used." (Sample quoting Blakemore, The Guardian UK) When referred to private parts of the body, we would all smirk as what comes to mind instantly. However, how about mind itself as the answer That according to me would be the most private part! The only thing we could essentially call ours. Our thought process, instincts, experiences, responses. Scanning brains of criminals, neurocorrection transforming "felons to fellows" is all good. However that too until a certain extent. It's a known fact that neuro scanning and analysis is only about a 90-95% accurate. Who does and how to account for the remaining percent which may wrongly convict the innocent In any case, just how neural is the crime in neural correction And how conditioning and circumstance driven And what when the logic extends to brain scanning in offices employing, schools, colleges Would it be right to retain children or staff with a particular IQ level What happens to learning on the job then Learning from experience Developing aptitude Evolving If merely a particular scan is going to "scientifically" determine one's state of sanity, the situation is grim "There is an incredible hunger to have tests to separate truth from deception, science be damned," warns neurobiologist Steven Hyman at Harvard University, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Counter Argument 3: If that was heads lets flip the coin and see what tails is. "In United States v. Erskine, the defendant (who had been convicted of making false statements to an official of a federally insured bank) argued on appeal that the court erroneously prevented him from introducing testimony and a brain scan that he claimed showed that he lacked the mental capacity to formulate the specific intent to "influence a bank" (a statutory element of the crime with which he was charged).U.S court accepted evidence. The defendant's conviction was reversed." (NIH, An Overview of the Impact of Neuroscience Evidence in Criminal Law) Thus this cloud too showed its silver lining. So what would you opt forHeads or tails Tails obviously! How to ensure that Not flipping the coin at all! Keeping the tail at the forefront and not flipping! Not giving chance a chance to produce an inappropriate verdict.Neurologist Helen Mayberg at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, who conducted the first clinical trial of deep brain stimulation in depressed patients, is optimistic about the work. "We have to keep safety in mind, but this could have absolutely unbelievable implications," she says. "Time will tell." Restoring Argument 3: I believe barring medico-legal procedures, brain scanning to purview suitability at other organizations should strictly be reviewed and regulated. Argument 4 To evaluate Self Enhancement procedures with respect to Freedom of personal Choice as against its Socio-Economical implications. "Hey I want to go get a safe and convenient laser surgery done to correct 20-20 vision"Sounds good! "Hey I want to go nose job done this weekend. I want a straighter one!"Any responses Self augmentation is an undeniable fact in the "facebook" driven world today, whether it comes out of the closet as a fact or not. Why should a bulky person not surgically correct the weight if that makes him/her more fit, agile, confident and socially more acceptable in their own eyes What does it matter if an ageing lady wants to hide but her age and wrinkles by Botox Its less harmful than hiding black money! The question is where to draw the line. Or for that matter where to start drawing it too. I agree with the author Arthur Caplan's view on this issue. He does acknowledge the fact that 14 year olds' opting for breast enhancement is inappropriate. Certain age and procedural regulation is essential. It's the authors' distinction between vanity and self regard that is note worthy. It is well put forth in this article by Sandel also. The moral problem with enhancement lies less in the perfection it seeks than in the human disposition it expresses and promotes.(Sandel, Whats wrong in Enhancement) Self improvement is one of the most basic in that it is freedom of choice and expression not causing any harm to others. Choice comes along with bearing responsibility for consequence inevitably. Counter Argument 4: I believe Caplan coining them anti melioristic would be taking it a tad too far as this topic Is sensitive. Dilemmas such as what is real in the end can make one's head spin. The socio economical implications are also more pronounced here. One ill implication that self augmentation leads is currently accessible only to an elite few. This propagates inequity in it's and disparity. I don't completely agree with Caplan in his criticizing the "anti-meliorists" question of whether one can be happy by biological tinkering. As eventually self does reflect and introspect its level of contentment. Also winning a match on strict disciplined regimen and sheer grit is far more appealing than steroid enhanced temporary performance. In his book Doing Right, author and former ethics professor David W. Gill talks about the pitfalls of coveting. "Ambition to prosper through hard work is not improper," says Gill. "But [this] desire can go off track by becoming obsessive and idolatrous or by leading us into covetousness." The desire to look better and feel healthier is not inherently evil. But what if that desire leads us to expensive cosmetic surgery, or extreme diets "The challenge is to balance self-acceptance, contentment, and trust in God's care with a constructive and appropriate ambition. This," concedes Gill, "is not easy in a culture such as ours." However the overall stigma that is associated with physical improvement procedures is definitely to be done away with. Conclusion Thus Ethical questions need not pose a conundrum to scientific advances or be just esoteric topics. It is never Ethics Vs Science. In fact it is them hand in hand that has made man evolve to the stage he is at today. As McMahan puts it across beautifully in the reference text, "Most plausible account of myself is an embodied consciousness". It is this consciousness that is to be triggered. We are required to comply with basics of Beneficence, non maleficience, autonomy, justice, veracity, fidelity and then utilize casuistry. It is for each one of us to perform a reality check of issues, be aware and further the right cause in right proportions! No matter how significant, breach of respect of sentiments shall not be tolerated from anyone, anywhere. As legendary James Watson who illustrated the structure of DNA along with Crick also realized. Even he had to resign as chancellor of Cold Springs Harbor in 2007 after causing uproar by suggesting that people from Africa were genetically less intelligent than whites! No white lies mister! In the movie Vanilla sky, Tom Cruise purchases a technology which makes his life a living dream which due to some "bug" in the program later goes on to become a nightmare. He then has a choice of an "upgrade" or the choice to dip out of the dream into a world 150 years in future. We have either choice to reinstate into lucid unchallenged technical dreams or to dip deep down further into giving it all, reasoning, applying logic and actualizing to obtain all that technology can provide. Not give more take less. Not take more either. Not a Penny more, not a penny less! Works Cited Purdue OWL. "MLA Formatting and Style Guide." The Purdue OWL. Purdue U Writing Lab, 10 May 2008. Web. 12 July 2009. Kuczewski, Mark Traditional applied philosophy "Methods of Bioethics: The Four Principles Approach, Casuistry, Communitarianism" 2 February 2002 Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics & Health Policy Date of Access 12 July 2009 < http://www-hsc.usc.edu/mbernste/tae.methods.kuczewski.html > Info Center . In Stem Cell Information. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009. Date of Access 12 July 2009 Hatch, Orrin U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah July 23, 2006, CBS News Sunday Morning with Charles Osgood Date of Access 13 July 2009 < http://pewforum.org/docs/index.phpDocID=320 > ThinkExist.com Quotations. "stem cellquotes". ThinkExist.com Quotations Online 1Jun.2009. 13Jul.2009 Reagan, Ronald New York Times 22 September 1980 An Overview of the Impact of Neuroscience Evidence in Criminal Law, "Neuroethics" September 2004 The Presidents Council on Bioethics, Date of Access 12 July 2009 McKenna, Phil quoting Hyman, Steve. "Can a brain scan prove that your telling the truth" 6 February 2007, Date of Access 12 July 2009 Sandel, Michael Whats Wrong with Enhancement "Beyond Therapy (Enhancement)" Dec 2002 The Presidents Council on Bioethics, Date of Access 12 July 2009 Sample, Ian "The brain scan that can read people's intentions" 9 February 2009. The Guardian UK Date of Access 13 July 2009 Fox, Douglas quoting Mayberg, Helen "Remote control brains: a neuroscience revolution" issue 2613 of New Scientist magazine, 18 July 2007, page 30-34. McGarvey, Stephen quoting Gill. The Ethics of Enhancement Issue Number 18, December 2007 Date of Access 12 July 2009, < http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/the-ethics-of-enhancementcomment=44> Read More