It’s no secret that stem cell research is a highly controversial topic that could potentially lead to big steps in the advancement of modern medicine. There are many factors that need to be considered when making an argument for or against stem cell research. Not just the physical, tangible factors (types of stem cells, possible uses and benefits, and funding) but the emotional ones (ethics and morals) as well. While understanding the reasons opposing stem cell research is simple, understanding the reasons supporting it may be even simpler. Stem cell research should continue because stem cell research has the potential to advance modern medicine and better our world. Technically, there is no defined function for stem cells within the …show more content…
Because these cells are pluripotent, meaning they are able to differentiate into all cell types in the body, they are extremely malleable making them a scientific marvel worth researching. This state of pluripotency means that these cells can be used to replace old damaged tissues or help rebuild destroyed parts of the body. However, the reason the use of these cells is so controversial, regardless of their high level of flexibility, functionality, and compatibility is because once the inner cell mass is removed, the blastocyst no longer has the potential to become a fully developed human being. Thus meaning the fetus will no longer become a living organism. It is this fact that has raised concerns as to the highly subjective question of whether or not an embryo is a human being. Similarly to the topic of abortion, the question of the rights of an unborn fetus are inherently controversial and complicate the issue of whether stem cell research is something to carry on with or to abandon due to the ethical issues at hand. Keeping in mind the legality of abortion, the question of whether or not stem cell research should be legal becomes apparent. If the people in legal guardianship of the aborted fetus give the right for the fetus to be used for stem cell research and advancement of medical science, the opportunity should be taken advantage of rather than thrown away. Throughout the Bush Administration, the issue
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
Embryonic stem cell research is important for further development in the medical field. It strongly supports the idea that every life has value, an idea known as human dignity. Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, and thus, are all equal. The idea of radical equality before God leads us to think no less of someone regardless of their physical appearance, religious beliefs, cultural background, or anything else. It is through virtues such as charity, mercy, and justice that our human dignity is preserved. By living through these virtues and realizing how to effectively instill them within us, we are able to live a virtuous life. This paper argues that although issues involving embryonic stem cell research are controversial, research in this area is typically permissible for further development in the medical field when looking to preserve human dignity. In order to defend this thesis, this paper will be structured into three sections as followed: the description of embryonic stem cell research, the development of a moral lens, and the moral argument and analysis of this case.
It can easily be seen that the potential scientific advance and discovery strongly outweigh any moral or legal implication imposed by religious or anti-abortion groups. Because embryonic stem-cell research has such a vast potential, it involves a net gain of life, and may eventually evolve to lose any legal or moral troubles, it should be considered one of the most useful and funded forms of scientific
In our government today Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President are all faced with making tough decisions for our country. These decisions are not only decided based off the constitution but the ideological shift as generations go on. Possibly one of the most controversial landmark decisions the government is currently being challenged with is the affair of abortion. In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States was presented the case of Roe v Wade. The ruling decided a person has the right to privacy protected by the due process clause of the 14th amendment. This gave women the right to decide to have an abortion, but only under regulations from the state. As a result of this case, scientific research was conducted on stem cells starting in 1978 when a scientist discovered stem cells in human cord blood. From 1981 to 1991 scientist tested stem cells in mice, hamsters, and later in primates. 1998 marked an important discovery of pluripotent stem cells in an embryo, which is where the problem lies between the morals and ethics of citizens and the politicians’ jobs to decide for the people what is right for stem cell research.
The studying of stem cells is a very controversial issue that has been around since 1998 when the research of the use of embryonic stem cell treatment began. The main issues surrounding the discussion of treating people with life-altering disabilities through the use of these pluripotent cells is the ethicality of the matter and whether or not it is a savage act against a fetus. Many who oppose the use of these stem cells derived from excess embryos use the formerly stated opinion to support their argument, while those who are pro research argue that the destroying of one life could save another. The core complications that arise in studying stem cells lies in many Christian-like ethics and morals, otherwise called Christian bioethics. These are rooted in the modern day controversies arising due to advancements made in biology and medicine, mixed with religious views that argue against it. The conflicting interests of the polar opposites which are scientists and those with religious views have caused many complications along the way to discovering new treatments and cures for diseased cells. This bumpy road which has refrained scientists from making tremendous breakthroughs must smooth itself out, and the only way possible is through coming to an agreement that certain stem cell research should be practiced, such as the IPSC and adult stem cells, and others like the
The importance of ethical issues is often understated in public knowledge. Embryonic stem cell research should be of the utmost importance in the American society due to increased federal funding and the promises research in this field hold. As with many other controversies, embryonic stem cell research can be described as a dispute between religion and science due to the destruction of a viable human embryo. Depending on the status an individual grants an embryo will likely determine their stance on the issue. Next, many changes in legality and public acceptance have prompted leaders to increase funding and expand research nationally. Since taxpayers’ dollars are at work, the public should be aware of this prevalent and advancing ethical issue and be informed of its specifics. The public should also be aware of the advancements in healthcare that this research promise. Due to the changes in funding and legality, many discoveries have been made, pushing this science further. Many scientists believe embryonic stem cell research holds the key to curing many bodily injuries and deadly diseases such as spinal cord and brain injuries, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s. Also, many scientists conceive that, in the future, it will be possible to “grow” human organs from an individual’s stem cells for transplantation. The latter are only a few of the plethora of anticipated and promised treatments research in this field holds. Lastly,
“How can the use of stem cells be so controversial?”, one may ask. If the stem cells are donated out of free will or were going to be destroyed anyway, how can putting them to better use be controversial? Sure, a potential life must be destroyed to save a life, but only before one can tell that it is a human. Should the use of stem cells for medical research and use be regulated? These questions and more will be discussed and pondered throughout this paper.
In the article, “Stem-Cell Research Utilizing Embryonic Tissue Should Not Be Conducted”, Bertha Alvarez Manninen argues on the basis that it is unethical to allow the destruction of embryos in order to further stem-cell research, by relating it to the destruction of human life. Manninen explains the different stages of the human embryo and how it can be legally justified as a human. Therefore, an embryo can be defended by basic human rights. She supports this using Kant’s formula of humanity, which, in summary indicates that humanity should never be treated as a means to an end.
Throughout the course of history, healthcare advancements have been some of the most important events to happen to the human race. Whether it was the invention of the first stethoscope or the first vaccine for polio, these findings have helped lengthen and improve human life, as well as aid scientists in better understanding humans as a species. In recent years, embryonic stem cells have been discovered to offer a variety of benefits to many different diseases and disorders. However, despite their amazing potential, the source of these lifesaving cells have brought up the question of ethics and morals in the scientific and medical communities as well as mainstream media. Is stem cell research worth the dangers and moral controversies in
Abortion, gay marriage, and illegal immigration are all hot button topics currently being faced by Americans. As ardently as each side defends their stance on a controversial issue, an opposing side fights with equal diligence for the beliefs they feel should be valued by our nation. Perhaps nowhere is this battle more heated than in the fight over stem cell research. While supporters of this new field of science tout it’s potential to cure everything from blindness to paralysis, those against stem cell science liken the procedures used by scientists to murder. It is my intention to bring to light the positive benefits of stem cell research as well as counter the claims used by many Pro-life groups who believe the scientists driving this
Stem cell research is surrounded by controversy, relating to the morality of the use of stem cells for medical procedures. This is often associated most strongly with embryonic stem cells, due to the fact that in order to harvest embryonic stem cells the formation of an embryo is necessary. Commonly it is argued that, since that embryo could have potentially became a human that it is unethical to destroy them for research. It is important to note that stem cell research in its very nature is unique from any other medical research, this is because stem cells are essentially blank slates of human cells, undifferentiated, meaning that these cells have potential to become
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.
A recent controversial topic in the past 15 years, has been on the research of Stem Cells and whether it’s ethically right or if it’s needed in our society to better global health. However stem research should in fact continue to be funded and supported because its benefits are a necessity for the future of human civilization and outweigh the other side of the argument on the issue.
Embryonic stem cell research is a highly controversial topic in today's society, this kind of stem cell commits to regenerate any type of tissue. Unfortunately, Embryonic Stem Cell Research has a dark side. To obtain these cells will kill the embryo automatically. In other words, the acquirement of the Human Embryonic Stem Cell includes performing an abortion. To obtain these cells, it would kill the embryo. This has created controversy since abortion is such a divisive topic. Politicians are uneasy to take sides. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell issue is today's Pandora's Box due to all the unwittingly chaos that it can bring to our lives. By having this new option available in the medical world,
Contrarily, supporters of embryonic stem cell research argue that such research should be pursued because the resultant treatments could have significant medical potential. In addition, leftover embryos could be given with permission and