1. Arriving to a Compromise
1. Culture  Ethics = unfair advantages
2. Culture  Ethics= unfair advantages?
• Therapeutic perspectives of human embryonic
stem cell research versus the moral status of a
human embryo – Does one have to be
compromised for the other?
-Divine Command Theory
-Rights Based Theory
-Modern Natural Law Theory
-Can a compromise be established?
• What if culture did not define the ethics
in hESC research?
-Utilitarianism approach
-Pragmatism & Straight market economics
-Globalized ethics on hESC Research
-Can a compromise be established?
• Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC)
-Adult stem cells genetically reprogrammed to
behave like ESC; preliminary testing suggests no
difference between iPSC and ESC
References
1 Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical. Vol. 14, No. 3, Summer 1985.
2 Hug K. Therapeutic perspectives of human
embryonic stem cell research versus the moral status of a human embryo
-does one need to be compromised for the other? Medicina (Kaunas) 2006; 42 (2): 107-14
3 von Lersner, Ariana, “The Ethics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research” (2013) Honors Ethical Issues
and Life Choices (PHI2630). Paper 2.
4 Devoldier, Katrien. Compromise and Moral Complicity in the Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Debate. Philosophical Reflections on Medical Ethics. 2005 Sep;pp.88-108
5 Schechter, Jody. Promoting Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Comparison of policies in
the United Stated and the United Kingdom and factor Encouraging Advancement. University of
Texas School of law. 2010.
Introduction
• Stem cell research is a field that possesses an
immense influence over regenerative medicine.
Today, many scientists are researching the
potentials that stem cells can have for curing
the aging diseases that are prevalent during
the 20th century. However, the use of human
embryonic stem cells has heralded a great
ethical debate among nations.
• Today, embryonic stem cell research laws vary
throughout the world and the root of this
difference lies within the culture of each
country. Every country takes a different
approach toward deciding their position on this
matter. This brings forth many positions
including pragmatism, utilitarianism, and rights
based points of view. It is interesting and
naturally imperative to analyze how each
country comes to a conclusion on these
matters based on the components that form
their culture (political, religious, etc.) and which
approach has proved most successful for the
advancement of hESC research.
Six policy options
If culture defines the ethics involved in conducting embryonic stem cell research differently,
does this confer unfair advantages in the global research arena?
Amaris Castanon¹
The University of Sheffield, UK¹
• Brown="flexible" derivations from fertility clinic donations only, excluding SCNT, and often under certain restrictions. (Option 3) Countries in this
category include Brazil, Canada, France, Iran, South Africa, Spain, The Netherlands, Taiwan, and others. These countries represent a global population
of more than 1 billion people.
• Yellow=“restrictive” policy or no established policy. Options 1 & 2. Restrictive policies range from outright prohibition of human embryo research to
permitting research on imported embryonic stem cell lines only to permitting research on a limited number of previously established stem cell lines.
Countries with a restrictive policy include Austria, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Norway, and Poland.
The map is designed to reflect national policy and whether or not public funds may be used to pursue stem cell research using IVF embryos donated
from fertility clinics. The black dots show the locations of some of the leading genome sequencing research centers. Most U.S. centers are those that have
been involved in the Human Genome Project. The genome sequencing centers are meant to indicate the level of scientific infrastructure and not whether
stem cell genomic studies are being conducted at a given center. The dots are linked to center web sites. components that form their culture (political,
religious, etc.) and which approach has proved most successful in the parameters of scientific interest.
Roots of ethical positions on Human Embryonic Stem Cell (hESC) Research worldwide
Conclusion
Option
1
No human embryo research is permitted,
and no explicit permission is given to
perform research on existing human
embryonic stem cells [Buddhism, Taoism,
Catholicism, Protestants ]
Option
2
Research is permitted only on existing human
embryonic stem cell lines, not on human embryos
[Eastern Orthodoxy]
Option
3
Research is permitted only on remaining embryos,
no longer needed for reproduction (Japan, India,
Canada, US during Bush admin.) [Judaism, Islam,
Hinduism]
Option
4
Research is permitted both on remaining embryos
no longer needed for reproduction (Option 3) and
on embryos created specifically for research
purposes through in vitro fertilization (IVF)
Option
5
Research is permitted both in remaining embryos
(Option 3) and on embryos created specifically for
research purposes through somatic cell nuclear
transfer into human eggs or zygotes [UK, Belgium,
China, India, Israel, South Korea, 2 states in the
US]
Option
6
Research is permitted both on remaining embryos
(Option 3) and on embryos created specifically for
research purposes through the transfer of human
somatic cell nuclei into nonhuman animal eggs, for
example, rabbit eggs (China)
Modern Natural Theory vs.
Divine Command Theory
• Modern Natural Theory: Morality that does not depend on
God; there is not a necessary link between Law and Morality
• Divine Command Theory: The ethical theory proposes that
our ethical duties are grounded in the commands of God;
reduces to voluntarism-the view that morality is based on the
will of God
• Human Rights: Followers of the Divine Command Theory
believe that embryos are entities entitled to human rights and
that their destruction would defy the command set by God to
respect life
• Personhood: Embryological studies show that fertilization is a
process not a moment-embryo at 14 days is not sensate; early
embryos are not sufficiently individualized to have the moral
weight of personhood. Other jurisdictions may say that since
embryos are potential persons, should they be with the moral
respect and dignity of personhood?
-Judaism
-Christianity
&
Catholicism
-Islam
-Hinduism
&
Buddhism
Rights Based Theory vs.
Consequentialism
• Rights Based Theory [Kant /Rawls]: There are rights that all
humans have based on the fact that they are human. These rights
can be natural or conventional. Natural rights are those that are
moral while conventional are those created by humans and
reflect society's values.
• Kant‟s Categorical Imperative: Act according to a maxim by which
you can, at the same time, will that it should be universal law
• Rawls‟ Veil of Ignorance: Deprives participants of information
about their particular characteristics: his or her ethnicity, social
status, gender and, crucially, their conception of The Good. This
forces participants to select principles impartially and rationally.
• Consequentialism [Bentham/Mill]: What makes an act a
good moral act is that it achieves a good result. Utilitarianism is
the consequentialist theory that says „the morally right thing to do
is that which provides the greatest happiness to the greatest
number of people‟
hESC research is fraught with ethical controversy on
many levels. Opponents of embryonic stem cell
research argue that a human life is taken in the name
of science (rights based). Supporters look to the life
saving potential of embryonic stem cell research in
developing cures and treatments for critical and life-
threatening diseases, saving many lives with one
embryo (utilitarianism) has proved most favorable for
scientific progress. Differing jurisdictions worldwide
either limit or allow progress in hESC research. It is
imperative to establish a dialogue with a society to
promote scientific advancement.