Stem cell research is among the most intensively discussed topics in present bioethics. Ethical
questions differ considerably when we compare the two kinds of stem cell that are the object of this
research: adult stem cell and embryonic stem cell. In the context of adult stem cell research, ethical
problems do not differ much from similar research using human biological material.
As to embryonic stem cell research, ethical problems are far more complicated, since during this
research human embryos are destroyed. The question arises: do we not cross here a moral border that
should be respected? Two very different positions are taken. The first position states that this kind of
research is to be justified because of its extraordinary utility (new prospects for uncurable diseases).
Moreover, zee can use spare embryos that are left over in in vitro fertilisation programmes. Another reason
is that the moral status of the pre-implantation embryo is not so clear. This first position is dominant among
the scientists.
The opposite position stresses our obligation to respect every human life. It can not be doubled that
the embryo is new human life. We are not allowed to victimise human life even for a very commendable
purpose. This position is held by marry religious people, by critics of scientific progress, but it also suits the
traditional ethos of the medical profession, since according to The Declaration of Geneva (19SS), the new
doctor pledges: "I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from its beginning".
An ethical analysis should give special attention to the notion of human dignity. Human life ought
not to be instrumentalised. A consequence may be that scientific research should practice more patience.
Then there may also arise ethically unproblematic possibilities, for instance. Induced pluripotent stems
cells. |