Ethical Issues With Stem Cell Research Essay

Most people are against Embryonic Stem Cell research mainly because they consider it unethical to use aborted fetuses for research. The two main issues concerning the research are the ethics (Cons) and the benefits (Pros). In any scientific case, ethics must always be considered. But the use of fetuses is something that is of the utmost importance. The costs are generally measured based off of people’s feelings, morals, and knowledge about the subject up for debate. The use of aborted fetuses for stem cell research may have many positive outcomes that can come of it, but many negative outcomes as well; If using aborted fetuses for research can, in the near future, save lives, then it is a research that should be supported, even though some

This report describes how ethics involving embryos has been ongoing for 25 years but has significantly increased with the stem cell controversy. Another issue brought up by this report is whether or not federal funds should be spent on an issue that is so ethically

Embryonic stem cell research is a controversial topic nationwide, because of its clash of ethical and moral values. Many people, including those suffering from diseases that this research is seeking to cure, do not believe in killing a living embryo in order to advance research and science.

There are people who disagree on the morality of using human embryonic cells, and stem cell research in general, nonetheless. Some stubborn pro-life organizations insist that the destruction of the “blastocyst, which is a laboratory-fertilized human egg” (White), is on the same level as murdering a human child and is entirely immoral and unacceptable. Even if these embryonic cells are being used to save lives and cure diseases, they believe it is wrong because the cells were taken at the cost of a

MLA style also specifies guidelines for formatting manuscripts and using the English language in writing and also provides a writers with a system for cross-referencing their sources--from their parenthetical references to their works cited page. This cross-referencing system allows readers to locate the publication information of source material. This is of great value for researchers who may want to locate your sources for their own research projects. The proper use of MLA style also shows the credibility of writers; such writers show accountability to their source material. Most importantly, the use of MLA style can protect writers from accusations of plagiarism--the purposeful or accidental use of source material by other writers

Unfortunately, embryonic stem cell research involves extracting stem cells from embryos, thus killing them in the process. According to Stanford.edu, “Opponents of HESC [Human Embryonic Stem Cell] research argue that the research is morally impermissible because it involves the unjust killing of innocent human beings.” Yes, these embryos are dying from the extraction of their stem cells, but the fact of whether or not this is killing innocent human beings solely depends on point of view. If you consider a five-day old embryo to be a human being, then perhaps you would consider this to be wrong, but you believe otherwise, then maybe you would agree with the sacrificing of these embryos for beneficial research. This is how embryonic stem cell research has been very controversial in prior years and even

be done without the baby dying. If the embryos were to die, I would be against stem cell

One of the ways to obtain stem cells for scientific research is to destroy a blastocyst (laboratory-fertilized human egg). Destroying the blastocyst is the equivalent of murder or ending a human life. Life begins at conception, and the destruction of this pre-born life is morally unacceptable and not justifiable. Even if the outcome of extracting these stem cells can be beneficial by saving or reducing

While few can debate the potential “miracle cure” aspect that seems to be wrapped within stem cell research, the method for obtaining such cells has been a topic for debate. The process of extracting pluripotent cells destroys their host embryo, and as yet, no pluripotent cells have been found in older adult tissues. Opponents of research on embryonic cells claim that embryos – from the moment that fertilization occurs – are sentient human beings and should therefore be afforded the same protections against abuse as anyone else (“The Cases For”). But what if a method were readily available were viable stem cells could be extracted from an embryo in a manner that would not deny life – however such life were defined – to the unborn fetus? What if such a potential solution could ease the minds of not only those who oppose stem cell research but also help to quell the dispute of another “Do Not Kill” issue – abortion?

Embryonic stem cells research has challenged the moral ethics within human beings simply because the point at which one is considered a “human,” is still under debate and practically incapable to make a decision upon.

In many cases of stem cell research, majority of ethical issues argue that the research and genetic modifications are morally wrong. Pang and Ho (2016) explain that techniques for generating designer babies, such as Mitochondria DNA replacement therapy and genetic engineering, have been used to prevent inheriting genetic defects through the selection of “disease genes” embryos by preimplantation diagnosis (p. 59) . These scientific modifications seem to be the gate way to prevent hereditary diseases being passed to future generations. As “life-saving” as these modifications might seem, they have a number a hidden risk factors. Experimental risk factors may come into consideration if the efficiency of the procedure is not adequately met. Because

While some people might say that stem cell research is immoral and unethical, others believe that it is a magical solution for almost any problem, thus leading to a very controversial issue. Scientists have been searching for years for ways to eradicate incurable diseases and perform other medical procedures that yesterday's technology would not fix. With the rapidly arising, positive research on stem cell technology, the potential that exists to restore any deficiency is in the same way, likely to destroy humanity. America is suffering from its inability to choose who holds precedence over this issue. Too many of us find it impossible to reach a basis for which our differing opinions can be shared and formed into a universal and

There is a rather surprising amount of medical benefits arising from therapeutic cloning research which have to be weighed before we assess where the debate is currently at. Doctors lay well founded expectations that by being able to study the multiple embryos developed through cloning, the causes of disastrous spontaneous abortions can be determined and much human loss can be averted. A greatly viable application lies in the field of clinical contraceptives. Leading contraceptive specialists perceive that if they can determine the manner in which an embryo knows where to implant itself, a contraceptive can be developed which will prevent embryos from implanting in the uterine wall. An additionally important branch of therapeutic cloning research is embryonic stem cell development. Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that can "evolve into almost any type of cell" (Lord 28) within the human body. These cells are not attacked by a person’s immune system because of their rapid maturation and undifferentiated status. Many doctors have reason to believe that these stem

Cartoons and movies around the world have shown the idea of regenerating limbs. Regenerating limbs might seem like a fantasy, but the idea might turn into a reality. STEM cells have biologist in awe. From healing scars to giving a person a completely new copy of their own heart, the capabilities and possibilities are endless. Yet some might argue that it is not right and the way to extract STEM cells is not ethical. The arguments can go on forever and ever. The way of extracting STEM cells is very controversial, but the practice can save millions of lives because they can be used to copy organs, create new organs, kill of many diseases.

If one is against aborting a human fetus at any stage, it stands to reason that they would also be against the destruction of a human embryo, as it is technically a human -- only biologically, not morally -- and it is technically alive, even if it is hardly more than a clump of cells. Considering this information, I don’t think it is possible to convince everyone of the benefits of therapeutic cloning, there is always going to be some ethical dilemma in someone’s mind. But as far as a resolution goes, I don’t think much more can be