Cover Story
by Karissa Clark
"They honestly believe [embryonic stem cell research] will heal more diseases, but it's much more theoretical."
Previous Cover Stories | Send mail to The Voice
Ethics of Stem Cell Research Disputed
Fox News covers Dr. David Prentice's presentation on stem cell research at the Shawnee Civic Center in Shawnee Mission, Kan. He works out of an office with the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. The 20-year-old nonprofit institution influences public policy regarding human life, marriage and family.
--Marjorie Prentice, photo
Stem cells can be found only in certain adult tissues or in the building material of an embryo. In the last six years, scientists have begun to experiment with the stem cells that come from a stored embryo. Although no treatments are yet available from the harvested cells, many scientists hope that these stem cells will become an effective way to eradicate cancer.
In current experiments to create a cure for cancer, stem cells are gathered and encouraged to reproduce. They must conform to the affected organ so they can replace the cancerous cells. The promise of embryonic stem cell research is that the cells have not fully developed. Unlike adult stem cells, embryonic cells have potential to develop into more than one type of cell.
The controversy over embryonic stem cell research occurs within both the scientific and political communities. The scientific community disagrees over the effectiveness of adult stem cells versus embryonic stem cells. Scientists, ethicists and politicians also face the question of the ethics of embryonic stem cell work.
To do research in this area, scientists first must completely destroy the embryo because it is in such an early stage of development. Embryos in storage are a result of in vitro fertilization when extra embryos are created. Parents have the option of donating their extra embryos to stem cell research.
Proponents of embryonic stem cell research point to the huge potential and promise in treating cancer through their work. Patricia Backlar is a research associate professor of bioethics at Portland State University in the philosophy department as well as an adjunct professor in the psychiatry department of the Oregon Health Sciences University. In 1996, President Clinton appointed her to serve on the chartered National Bioethics Advisory Commission, which produced the report, "Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research" (1999).
"I am no scientist, you must understand," Professor Backlar said. "But one should be able to go forward. To do the basic science, you need to use embryos."
The key issue, she said, lies in receiving permission to use donated embryos. "It's a private decision [by the parents], not a public decision," she said. "[Donation] needs to be regulated so that before the procedure of in vitro fertilization occurs, the doctors ask the donors (parents) what they want to happen with the leftover embryos. Without federal funding, a lot of the research may not be having enough regulation."
The current laws give parents the right to donate embryos for research.
However, researchers such as David Prentice point out sources other than embryos for stem cells. Dr. Prentice has been working in stem cell and cloning research since 1981, examining the ethics of such activities.
Dr. Prentice, who was the professor of Life Science at Indiana State University, is a member of the Family Research Council. He has addressed the topic of stem cell research with bodies such as the U.S. Congress and the British Parliament. His work has focused on helping politicians align their definitions of human life, embryos and ethical experimentation.
"Society sets rules about what experiments are valid," Dr. Prentice said. "They honestly believe [embryonic stem cell research] will heal more diseases, but it's much more theoretical. Good science is ethical science."
Scientists and researchers draw embryos that were created in the process of in vitro fertilization from large embryo storage centers.
Couples who are unable for any reason to fertilize the egg naturally can have the mother's eggs fertilized by the sperm in a laboratory. This artificial process creates more than one fertilized embryo. Because only one embryo is implanted in the womb, many embryos are left over.
An adoption program is available for these embryos. Adoptive parents can have one of the frozen embryos implanted in a woman's womb where it will grow into a human being. This is not a popular form of adoption, and many of the embryos do not survive the storage process.
Many scientists believe the embryos should be destroyed and used for stem cell experimentation because the embryos are unwanted and may not grow to maturity anyway.
Other scientists work with adult stem cells and with stem cells harvested from umbilical cord blood, which is otherwise discarded. The stem cells scientists gather from these sources have a more limited purpose but still serve specific needs.
Dr. Prentice said, "Adult stem cells have already treated adults and are continuing to heal people. Stem cells taken out of an adult's bone marrow are used all over the world to treat heart damage."
Adult stem cells are used in 56 types of treatments, including treatment for Parkinson's disease, brain cancer and sickle cell anemia.
The issue of stem cell research has had a larger impact since scientists have applied for grants to gain federal funding to research embryonic stem cells.
In June 2001, President George W. Bush addressed this issue in a speech: "As the discoveries of modern science create tremendous hope, they also lay vast ethical mine fields."
President Bush went on to declare that his administration would refuse any further federal funding for new lines of embryonic research.
Federal funding will continue for the 60 embryo lines already created. President Bush has allowed continued funding for research on these 60 embryos because "the life and death decision has already been made."
"Politically," Dr. Prentice said, "it's all about funding. In the debate, what we're hearing about is a 'ban' on embryonic stem cell research."
California's Proposition 71 submits a plan for $3 billion of state tax money to be allotted for further embryonic stem cell research.
Dr. Wayne Strickland, who teaches an ethics course for seniors at Multnomah Bible College, has dealt with this issue. "We may need to face the fact that there may not be a good ethical solution. There should not be a guilt trip; the Gospel is reconciling. Instead, we need to change society to value life more," he said.
About the ethics of embryonic stem cell research, Professor Backlar said, "Overselling something that may not be useful will not make people trustful--you can't just ignore people's beliefs and run roughshod over them. But I do hope we can come to a place where we can all agree."
Dr. Strickland said, "I think that 21st century technology is flexible enough, fluid enough and resilient enough to find other ways to get cures."
As in ethical questions about abortion, many scientists believe the embryos are not valid human beings because they cannot develop on their own. Christian thought has contradicted that idea, Dr. Strickland said.
"I don't think you can find an instance where the Bible ever sacrificed the individual for the good of the many," he said.
"We do believe in compassion, but we have to honor God. So why not place our energy in exploring more options and more possibilities? We want to honor the Christopher Reeves, but we are not dishonoring them by making sure others are not hurt."
Previous Cover Stories | Top Of Page
Send mail to The Voice| Journalism department website
© 2004 The Voice. No part of this publication may be reproduced in written or electronic form without prior written consent from the journalism adviser of Multnomah Bible College. All rights reserved.