Human embryo experimentation is defined as, “Experimentation on, or using the organs or tissues from, a human or other mammalian conceptus during the prenatal stage of development that is characterized by rapid morphological changes and the differentiation of basic structures. In humans, this includes the period from the time of fertilization to the end of the eighth week after fertilization.”
Currently, in modern science, research is being conducted on human embryos to provide information on stem cell research. Embryonic stem cell research is biological research conducted on stem cells derived from embryos and on the stem cells’ use in medicine. Embryonic stem cell research is believed to have great potential to aid in curing and treating disorders and mutations. These include type 1 diabetes mellitus, Parkinson’s disease as well as post-myocardial infraction hearts. However, scientists are now conducting these human embryonic stem cell experiments by growing an embryo within a lab.
Within the scientific field of human embryonic development, there is a rule that states the embryonic development and experimentation cannot exceed fourteen days, scientist must terminate the development of the embryo prior to the limit of fourteen days. Human embryonic stem cell research and embryonic research in general, have raised many ethical dilemmas. Reproductive rights and technologies have been at the forefront of politics and science in recent decades.' The development of contraception, abortion, and-most recently-cloning have challenged the moral and ethical beliefs of many people. Human embryo research has likewise fueled ongoing debate within scientific, ethical, and legal circles. Not only is this ethical dilemma being discussed amongst the biologists, but it is also being discussed amongst medical professionals, media, ethicists, governments, and politicians. Human embryonic stem cell research is providing society with the question to choose between two moral principles: the duty to prevent and alleviate suffering, or the duty to respect and value human life.
One the one hand, human embryonic stem cells provide science with major clinical potential in tissue repair. The stem cells’ proponents believing that they represent the future relief or cure of a several common disabilities. An early embryo that has not yet implanted into the uterus does not have the psychological, emotional or physical properties that we associate with being a person. It therefore does not have any interests to be protected and we can use it for the benefit of patients. Fertilized human eggs are just parts of other people’s bodies until they have developed enough to survive independently. The only respect due to blastocysts is the respect that should be shown to other people’s property. If we destroy a blastocyst before implantation into the uterus we do not harm it because it has no beliefs, desires, expectations, aims or purposes to be harmed.
However, the other side of the debate argues the unethical aspect of experiment because the stem cells are derived from human preimplantation embryos. To obtain embryonic stem cells, the early embryo has to be destroyed. This means destroying a potential human life. These embryos are created for the sole purpose of experimentation and are exterminated prior to fourteen days. Development from a fertilized egg into to baby is a continuous process and any attempt to pinpoint when personhood begins is arbitrary. A human embryo is a human being in the embryonic stage, just as an infant is a human being in the infant stage. Although an embryo does not currently have the characteristics of a person, it will become a person and should be given the respect and dignity of a person. If we judge the moral status of the embryo from its age, then we are making arbitrary decisions about who is human. For example, even if we say formation of the nervous system marks the start of personhood, we still would not say a patient who has lost nerve cells in a stroke has become less human.
For decades, scholars have debated the ethical dilemma of stem cell research. While researching both sides of this moral and scientific debate, I have created an informed decision that if asked my opinion on this subject, it would be as follows: with my thirteen years of education, especially most recently, taking grade eleven biology, I have been educated with the knowledge that from the moment an egg is fertilized, be it in-utero or in-vitro, life begins. Although, I can understand the other side of the debate; stating that stem cell research is necessary for the advancement of medical and scientific research. Based on my beliefs, the moment the egg is fertilized, the process of human life begins. Henceforth, creating a human being and then killing it days later does not seem ethical to me. If we judge the moral status of the embryo from its age, then we are making arbitrary decisions about when life begins. For example, even if we say formation of the nervous system marks the start of personhood, we still would not say a patient who has lost nerve cells in a stroke has become less human.
As I pursue a career in the medical field, I realise my beliefs may be questioned and I may have to put my personal beliefs aside and let my professional beliefs as a future medical worker acknowledge that this research is necessary to potentially treat and cure human medical conditions.
No comments:
Post a Comment