Introduction
The moral question behind embryonic stem cell research has occupied the minds of not just the medical and research communities, but also politicians and the general public. On the one side of this polarized debate, we have proponents of embryonic stem cell research who contend that it holds the key to revolutionary biomedical findings that will greatly enhance human welfare (Tsai, 2005). Conversely, those opposed to stem cell research argue that because there is an embryo involved, which later on transforms into human life, undertaking this type of research is tantamount to ending a potential life (Lo & Parham, 2009). There is no clear-cut answer on either of these two forms of ethical debate. In particular, policymakers and scientists have to wrestle with the question of whether a human life for a few days is more valuable than alleviating human suffering from a possibly disastrous injury or illness. While many researchers and policymakers hold the view that stem cell research holds a promising future for the discovery of cures to such chronic illnesses as diabetes and heart disease, undertaking this kind of research destroys human life and should thus not be pursued.
Stem cells refer to a group of “undifferentiated” body cells. In other words, stem cells hold the potential to eventually produce any form of body tissue. Therefore, stem cells hold the key to a lasting cure for an array of physical ailments and chronic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, and Parkinson’s disease, among others (Dresser, 2010). For this reason, stem cell embryonic research is of special interest to both the medical and scientific communities, given its potential for alleviating these chronic illnesses that afflict the human population. Week-old blastocysts give rise to embryonic stem cells. To generate the week-old blastocysts, the eggs have to first undergo an in vitro fertilization process. The ability of embryonic stem cells to differentiate renders them susceptible to possible manipulation by scientists, something that adult stem cells cannot do. This is because adult stem cells first need to undergo an intricate de-differentiation process prior to their use (Johnson & Williams, 2006). Scientists can exclusively manipulate the media containing embryonic cells with a view to modifying the genetic structure of such cells. On account of this capability, stem cell research raises an ethical debate regarding the potential destruction of human life.
Proponents of embryonic stem cell research are of the view that the week-old blastocysts that later on form embryonic stem cells are nothing more than a collection of cells. Accordingly, harvesting them is an ethical practice as they do not yet constitute human life. For this reason, the embryos should not warrant similar human rights to those accorded to other differentiated cells. Proponents further contend that stem cells have the potential to develop novel, healthy tissue that would in turn help to replace damaged or dead tissue (Harvard Stem Cell Institute, 2007. Advances in stem cell research could therefore lead to new cures or treatments for various chronic diseases like diabetes, Alzheimer's, as well as heart disease, among others. According to the majority of conservatives and liberals, stem cells have a lot of potential for improving human life, which more than compensates for any drawbacks associated with the moral concerns of stem cell research. They further argue that embryonic stem cell research will enable the medical and research community to gain further insights into a wide range of debilitating human conditions and diseases. Advances realised in the area of stem cell research in the last decade have been very encouraging, and this has seen the scientific community request additional Federal funding in support of stem cell research.
Those who are against the conduct of stem cell research take an ethical stand in arguing that the practice destroys a human life, which they equate to the killing of a human being. Even if we were to consider the various likely benefits that could accrue from stem cell research, the fact that it causes the end of a potential human life is enough reason to oppose the practice. Opponents further argue that the blastocyst cells, which later on yield the stem cells, are in themselves a human life. Accordingly, they should be accorded similar protection and rights to those warranted by other human beings (Harvard Stem Cell Institute, 2007). For this reason, engaging in embryonic stem cell research is in itself a violation of basic human rights, including the right to life and the right to enjoy a dignified life. Embryos constitute human life at its most vulnerable and should hence enjoy maximum protection. Failure to do so would be a bold statement that our societal moral fiber has indeed eroded. Advocates of stem cell research argue that engaging in this activity can be likened to an attack on the lives of innocent human beings who cannot defend themselves and is, hence, by extension, an assault on the human race (Dresser, 2010). Moreover, opponents of stem cell research are convinced that human life starts at the point of conception, when an egg has been fertilized by a male sperm. Therefore, manipulation of a week-old embryo in the hope of realizing scientific breakthroughs constitutes destruction of human life. While the majority of the opponents of embryonic stem cell research recognize the dedication made by scientists in their quest to find cures to various maladies afflicting mankind by exploiting stem cells, they are of the view that such scientists should be committed towards harvesting stem cells from non-human embryos (Johnson & Williams, 2006). This is because doing so would preserve human life and the associated dignity. In recent years, the scientific community has made considerable advances in the study of stem cells obtained from umbilical cords and adult cells. Doing so is not regarded as an unethical practice by opponents of embryonic stem cell research, as it does not entail having to terminate a human embryo.
Conclusion
Stem cell research remains a contentious issue, given that it has divided society into two main groups: those who support the practice and those who are against it. While embryonic stem cell research holds the potential for cures of various chronic diseases, engaging in such advanced sciences as this places humankind at risk of compromising our moral standards. Even as the scientific community engages in the manipulation of stem cells to realise medical breakthroughs under the guidance of good intentions, the moral aspect of such a process remains questionable. This is because the week-old blastocytes that are manipulated by scientists into stem cells constitute human life at the cellular level. Consequently, engaging in a practice that contravenes some of the basic human rights, like the right to life and dignity, is unethical, even if it holds promising breakthroughs in the diagnosis and cure of chronic diseases.
References
Dresser, R. (2010). Stem Cell Research as Innovation: Expanding the Ethical and Policy Considerations.
Harvard Stem Cell Institute (2007). Examining the ethics of embryonic stem cell research.
Johnson, J.A., & Williams, E.D. (2006). Stem Cell Research: State Initiatives.
Lo, B., & Parham, L. (2009). Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research.
Tsai, D. (2005). Human embryonic stem cell research debates: A Confucian argument. J Med Ethics, 31(11), 635-640.
