Humanities Ethics - Research Paper Example

Embryonic stem cell research What are the embryonic stem research controversies? Embryonic stem cell research has been a subject to numerous controversies since the discovery of the potential clinical use of the cells. Controversies with regard to the value of the embryo as an early stage of human life and the importance of saving a human’s life or alleviating them from pain from pain have been so difficult to deal with. In 2002, an article in PNAS stated the application of the human embryonic stem cells in tissue engineering or transplantation due to their ability to differentiate into different cell types (James, 45). Research on the ES cells has then brought to the fore certain considerations with regard to human ethics. For the research to take place, the human embryo has to be harvested in order to investigate the phenomenon of interests. A balance cannot however be established between succeeding in helping another life using the embryo as it continues to exist. What are the ethical dilemmas involved in the embryonic stem cell researches? Despite the hot debate that surrounds the research use of embryonic stem cells, they offer better opportunity for harnessing certain therapies. Due to the controversy, most of the countries have adopted their own different rules that regulate the application of the Human Embryonic cells in research. Opinion is divided on what the value of human life is and the life of the embryo. It then exudes an ethical dilemma that complicates the application of the ES cells in solving most of the clinical problems (James, 45). The moral dilemma establishes a situation in which a choice has to be made from the two existing sensitive options. One, there is the duty prevent or relieve patients from chronic pains and two, the duty to respect the inherent value of human life. However, one cannot choose to respect both; one choice has to be made and the justifications for making such choices often live many with a sense of guilt (Holland, 43). When the embryo is removed for research purposes, there is the destruction of potential human life. It is also deemed that the ES cells have the potentials of enhancing a discovery of a new medical treatment that can help in the prevention or elimination of pain or save the lives of human beings (Holland, 43). It has been however been difficult to approve one option vis-a-vis the other. The arguments then goes that it is not ethical to destroy embryo given the fact that they possess full moral status beginning from fertilization and as they progresses through maturity. Others observe that an embryo should be considered as a person despite the fact that it is still an embryo (James, 45). They espouse the retention of life of the embryo by stating that there is a continuous process involved in the life of an embryo beginning from fertilization. They note that just like an infant is considered a human being then is the embryo. The argument goes further that people would tend to dismiss the significance of an embryo as a person just because they do not have the characteristics of a human being (Holland, 43). This should not be the angle of justifications because through the process of growth, the embryo will develop the said attributes. They concur that it is arbitrary to determine the period or stage when personhood commences, hence an embryo should not be dismissed as not being a person (Holland, 43). However, another explosive counter argument has continued to make decisions on the ES cells application very difficult. It explains that an embryo lacks the justification levels of being described as a person (Holland, 43). This is because unlike humans they do not have emotional, psychological and physical properties exhibited by humans or persons. As such there is no interest at all that is demonstrated by the embryo to regard protection and should be used to help persons who are in deeper pains with their lives hanging on the balance (James, 45). Another argument indicates a “cut-off” point at 14 days after fertilization that needs to be considered before terminating the existence of an embryo or letting others suffer. This view holds that embryo can only be used before 14 days if need be, after which it is not supposed to be terminated since it has acquired some of the human properties (Holland, 43). It continues that after 14 days embryo cannot undergo split to for twins, a process that can only occur before 14 days. There is no central nervous system and as such lack of senses before the 14th day after fertilization. This view reiterates that organs have been taken from the bodies of dead persons to be used in organ transplants hence an embryo can also be used for the relevant purposes before it reaches the 14th day after which it develops senses. It is then clear that embryos lack definition of being an individual before the 14th day and can be used where applicable (Andrews et al, 37). It is also conceivable that there is an increase in status of an embryo as time progresses. As such it should then be protected in order to reach a stage where it qualifies the personhood status. This argument considers certain stages in the development of an embryo as possessing more moral status than the others. Some of these stages as it identifies include the embryo’s implantation onto the uterine wall after six days following fertilization (Holland, 43). When the primitive streaks begin to appear and the development of the nervous system at around 14 days, the age when a premature birth could still lead to surviving baby and birth. However, the counter argument against this position is that the life of a person is protected not simply of their value from the point of view but simply because they help the life of the concerned person (Keirstead et al, 706). For instance, the life of the embryo is valuable to it; therefore, it should be protected on that basis not based on the moral status that the embryo holds to others. It reiterates that it is an arbitrary decision on the value of human life if an embryo is protected on the judgment of the moral values it holds from its age. When the life of an embryo and that of a person who has suffered the loss of nerve cells are compared it is not proper to say that the development of the nerve cells in an embryo overrides the life of another person with lost nerve cells. The latter has not become less human simply because of the lost cells and should not be viewed less moral restoring than destroying the embryo (Andrews et al, 37). There are those who believe that embryo is void of any element of moral status. That it is just an organ in the body the exhibits equal attributes just as the other body organs. They note that fertilized eggs make part of a human’s body until such a time the embryo is independent and can survive on its own without depending on the contributions from the systems of the mother. This view observes that the only respect that the treatment of embryo is worth of is that other’s property (James, 45). It continues that the destruction of blastocyst before implantation does not harm the embryo because it is void of expectations, desires, beliefs or aims and purpose. The counters of this argument notice that when embryo is taken out without letting it reach the development levels when it qualifies to called a human being (Holland, 43). What are the Religion contributions on the ES cells Research? Different religions offer their own different positions with regard to the value of the embryo. Conservative protestant churches, orthodox and the Roman Catholic believe that a human beings are described by the development from conception. As such, any attempt to destroy embryo translates to the destruction of life of a human being. The positions of these churches then is that no research should not be done on embryo in order to respect the sanctity of human life as bestowed upon them by their creator (James, 45). Other religions also have their own different positions with regard to ES cells research. Islam and Judaism for instance posit that an embryo has not gained full human status until when it is 40 days old from fertilization. They argue that if another person’s life can be helped when the embryo is destroyed then it should be done so. In other ways they permit research on the ES cells (Keirstead et al, 706). What are the main deductions or conclusion on the embryonic stem cell research? Studies and findings have identified ES cells to have clinical potentials of solving certain medical problems. An ethical dilemma that puts the life of the embryo against the interest to treat or help others eliminate pains and suffering. One must be done yet all are important, hence creating controversies on what the best practice should be with regard to research on the ES cells and the value of human life. Many arguments have therefore emerged through the determination of the moral values of the embryo and the noblest desire to help lives. Different countries noting the controversy that appears almost difficult to solve have created rules that regulate response to research on the human ES cells. References Andrews P, Matin M, Bahrami A, Damjanov I, Gokhale P, Draper J. "Embryonic stem (ES) cells and embryonal carcinoma (EC) cells: opposite sides of the same coin".Biochem Soc Trans 2005: 33 (Pt 6): 1526–30. Holland, Suzanne. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy. Cambridge, Mass. [u.a.: MIT Press, 2001. James, Charles D. An Ethical Debate on Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Human Dignity or Research Freedom?Mu?nchen: GRIN Verlag GmbH, 2009. Internet resource. Keirstead HS, Nistor G, Bernal G.  "Human embryonic stem cell-derived oligodendrocyte progenitor cell transplants remyelinate and restore locomotion after spinal cord injury". J. Neurosci 2005. 25 (19): 4694–705. Read More