Stem cell research - Term Paper Example

Stem cell research Argument for stem cell research Introduction Stem cell research has been a controversial topic has attracted debate for several years with many scholars raising concerns on several issues that surround the research (Freedman, 2007). Proponents of stem cell research claim that it has led to new medical discoveries that have facilitated the treatment of complex diseases and disorders such as spinal cord injuries while opponents claim that embryonic stem cells use degrades human life and dignity (Forman, 2008). Stem cells are non-specialized cells that have potential of creating other cells such as brain, tissue and blood cells and are more potent in fetus than in adult body. Stem cell research is divided in to embryonic stem cells, cord blood stem cells and adult stem cell research (Freedman, 2007). The adult stem cells are taken from the bone marrow, brain and spinal cord while cord blood stem cells are taken from newborn’s umbilical cord. The third is the most controversial embryonic stem cells that are taken from the embryo and thus leading to the death of the embryo since the embryo comprises mainly stem cells (Forman, 2008)). Accordingly, totipotent stem cells can differentiate in any form of cell while unipotent stem cells have unlimited reproductive capabilities and can only differentiate in to single type of tissue or cell (Freedman, 2007). In this paper, I will argue that stem cell research is essential research since its findings lead to medical advancements that can be used to cure complex diseases and disorders thus improving the overall quality of life in the society. Arguments for stem cell research Proponents of stem cell research assert that it has demonstrated the capability of regenerating all body areas and repairing damaged body tissues thus curing degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease and cancer related complications (Freedman, 2007). In addition, the field of study is holds key to reversing the negative impacts of ageing process thus it is critical in prolonging life and ensuring high standards of living among populations (Forman, 2008). The proponents counter the argument that stem cell research leads destroying innocent young life by claiming that the embryo does not have the psychological, emotional and physical properties associated with human beings before it is implanted in to the uterus. It is follows that the embryo lacks the criteria for personhood and thus has not any interests that should be protected and is why it should be used for the future benefit of those who meet the personhood criteria (Freedman, 2007). Accordingly, some biological studies have suggested that the embryo has no central nervous system before fourteen days and thus fertilization is a process, but not a ‘moment’ thus stem cell research does not entail destruction of life. According to deontological or duty-based arguments, there is so much medical suffering among people thus it is moral duty to support stem cell research (Palmquist, 2010). The research is carried out in approved medical centers for vitrofertilization and according to utilitarian argument its is right to carry out stem cell research since it leads to desirable end for the greatest number of citizens in the society. Stem cells do not necessarily come from the embryo since they can be taken from the umbilical cord, placenta, amniotic fluid, adult tissues and bone marrow. Adult stem cells have demonstrated ability to cure diseases such as the use of bone marrow cells from the hipbone to repair the scars on the heart after heart attacks (Forman, 2008). The proponents argue that stem cell research is worthy funding since health care problems since the Second World War have led to advances in clinical research that have ultimately led to new vaccines and treatments of controlling new diseases. It is possible to attain high quality care through replacing the damaged endothelial cells in blood vessels thus helping patients who suffer from Parkinson’s disease or diabetes (Freedman, 2007). Although stem cell research may seem expensive, its development, testing and production will outweigh the initial research costs and lead to medical treatments that ultimately reduce healthcare costs (Freedman, 2007). According to arguments from the historical and legal precedents is that if the majority approve certain actions then majority are right and the research should move ahead. Majority of the people support stem cell research and such it should be made a public policy while the minority may disagree with such policy. A political argument for stem cell research is that public support is essential in any research in order such research benefits the wider population and private sector does not exploit the citizens in making huge profits. The government has a duty of financing such research to prevent undesirable activities and ensure citizens have access to new medical treatments (Freedman, 2007). Arguments against stem cell research Those opposed to stem cell research argue that it is unethical to end human life as embryos posses the same right to life and dignity as human beings and failure to protect the right to life erodes the moral fiber of the society (Freedman, 2007). The opponents are convinced that life starts at conception and argue that research should not aim at causing harm to other human beings and such destruction of the week-old human embryos through stem cell research is tantamount to destruction of life (Humber & Almeder, 2010). According to teleological objections, it is not possible to quantify the number of people that will incur undesirable impact or will be hurt during the experimentation. Previous unsuccessful attempts have proved that human beings may incur health complications such as lose of the immunology system or terminal diseases for engaging in the risky stem cell research experiments (Forman, 2008). Humber & Almeder (2010) asserts that the opponents raise a slippery-slope argument by asserting that stem cell research will lead to more unethical medical research such as testing brain cell in primates such as Chimpanzees thus contributing to more ethical dilemmas (Novak, 2007). The research will encourage cloning and other medical experiments that aim at lowering the dignity and value of human life (Freedman, 2007). Another feminine argument against stem cell research is that it has the potential of exploiting women for their embryo in order to provide eggs for stem cells. The research will lead to commodification of human life and dehumanization of women for the sake of harvesting their eggs in order to enhance scientific progress that is unethical (Monroe, Miller & Tobis, 2007). This practice contravenes the inherent human rights and dignity of women and may in future open avenues where women sell their eggs to the private enterprise for research purposes thus leading to more harm to the society (Freedman, 2007). There are concerns that stem cell therapy may pass microscopic agents or viruses that cause dangerous diseases to the recipients of such cells during the transplantation process since the strong drugs usually wipe out the immune system of the patient (Monroe, Miller & Tobis, 2007). The opponents argue that wiping out the immune system in order for the body to accept the new cells poses a danger of transferring new viruses or making the patient more vulnerable to diseases thus leading to poor health outcomes of the process (Humber & Almeder, 2010). According to religious perspectives, Catholicism opposes stem cell research and embryonic research and its aims as they are of the view that life starts at conception (Monroe, Miller & Tobis, 2007). Protestant Christians argue that the embryo has the status of human being right from conception while Judaism and Islam assert that embryos attain human status after some period. In this case, all religions are against destroying human life thus stem cell research is unethical from the religious perspective (Humber & Almeder, 2010). Currently, scientific research has shown that cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer cannot directly produce organs or tissues without having to clone the embryo. In this case, there is a moral objection of stem cell research since scientists are unable to bypass the creation of an embryo stage in order to produce tissues or reprogram the cells to produce either chemicals or hormones. The embryo gives rise to new adult organisms unlike the skin cells that differentiate in to other skin cells (Freedman, 2007). Conclusion I fully support stem cell research and more funding should be allocated towards the research since it lead to medical treatments that cure complex diseases and disorders and has the opportunity of helping individuals undergoing the ageing process. Stem cell research promises advances in medical knowledge that will lead to new therapies that can cure disorders and complex diseases. The general principle of liberty of scientific inquiry for funding the research since it will ultimately benefit a large population in the society through improved quality of life. Stem cell research moral dilemma centers on the duty to alleviate human suffering and cure emerging diseases versus the duty to respect the dignity and value of human life. In this case, it is important to focus on the larger implication of scientific research rather than focus on isolated ethical and moral arguments that will deny the entire population the benefits of research such as prolonged life and better health care. Stem cell research can lead to medical discoveries that alleviate suffering, but it sometimes entails destroying potential human life. Stem cell research promises cure to degenerative and complex illness such as cardiovascular cancer and most medical practitioners are of the view that funding cancer research will be more beneficial and useful to the entire population. References: Forman, L. (2008). Stem cell research. Minnessota: ABDO Publications. Freedman, J. (2007). America debates stem cell research. New York: Rosen Publications. Humber, J.M & Almeder, R.F. (2010). Stem cell research. New York: Humana Press. Kelly, E.B. (2007). Stem cells. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Monroe, K.R., Miller, R.B & Tobis, J.S. (2007). Fundamentals of the stem cell debate: the scientific, religious, ethical, and political issues. London: University of California Press. Novak, D. (2007). The sanctity of human life. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Palmquist, S. (2010). Cultivating personhood: Kant and Asian philosophy. New York: De Gruyter. Read More