Controversy surrounding stem cells research and ethics

Ethics - Stem Cells

THE ETHICAL ISSUE of STEM CELLS

Life Begins at Conception":

The belief that human life begins at conception is not a statement of fact but of religious belief. That statement is the source of tremendous controversy because it lies at the root of the Right-to-Life movement and political lobby that promotes anti-stem cell dogma in the United States. However, both the motivation of our Forefathers in establishing an independent nation and the U.S. Constitution specifically prohibit any national religion (Dershowitz, 2002). While the religious-based idea that a fertilized human zygote consisting (literally) of only a few cells of human tissue is fully human is a validly-held (if inaccurate) personal belief, it cannot be the basis of secular law in the U.S. (Dershowitz, 2002).

In truth, human life began about one billion years ago with the evolution of the very first forms of biological life on earth and a few undifferentiated cells of human tissue is no closer to being a human being than either sperm cell or ovum prior to fertilization. Each represents only the potential for human life under the right circumstances (Sagan, 1997; Sagan & Druyen, 1998). Certainly, fertilization accomplishes the joining of two sets of DNA, but a fingernail clipping or flake of human dandruff also contain a complete set of human DNA, and therefore, that alone cannot possibly be the basis of differentiating non-life from human life that deserves "protection." As the late Carl Sagan often pointed out (1997; 1998), the majority of human pregnancies are actually aborted spontaneously as a heavy menstrual flow, and usually without any awareness on the part of the woman that she was ever pregnant, yet we do not mourn the loss as the death of a human being.

Identifying the Appropriate Line Between Science and Morality:

The definition of biological life and the criteria for when a collection of human cells can be justifiably considered alive lie exclusively within the realm of science, particularly since modern science is capable of observing fetal development directly and precisely. That is not to suggest that scientific criteria can necessarily pinpoint any specific instant or moment in time when a developing fetus can logically be considered a living human being, but only because such precision is impossible.

In principle, there is no doubt that medical science can identify the various stages of fetal development associated with the biological structures and processes that make us human. Likewise, they can identify the point where suffering becomes possible because neurological development produces the ability to perceive pain (Levine, 2008).

Therefore, the appropriate use of scientific criteria would be to link ethical concern for the fetus to sentience, and simply to err on the side of caution where pinpoint identification of sentience is impossible to know with certainty.