The issue with ethics stemming from differing views and morals
Embryonic stem cell research and therapy:
As aforementioned, stem cells can be embryonic, adult or induced pluripotent. In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is the process used to acquire embryonic cells. These are taken before they would usually have been implanted into the uterus for baby development. The origin of these particular stem cells is the cause for the controversy and arguments on ethics. These embryonic cells could have been further developed into children and some consider it as stealing a life or ending the life of a potential human being. This view however is disputed amongst religions and cultures as well as different individual’s morals. The main concern over …show more content…
Conservative Christians believe that as soon as conception occurs, the embryo is considered to be a person. Some believe that embryos have the same ‘interests and rights’2 as a live person and that these aspects should be respected. According to this perspective, destruction of an embryo for research or therapy is ‘tantamount to murder’3. This opposes the views prevalent in Judaism and Islam. Here they believe that the embryo is not a human until 40 days after conception. These religions believe that within that 40 day period it is acceptable to use the embryo for stem cell therapy and abortion whereas other religions or sects are completely against the notion. As well as religious views, these embryos aren’t just taken from couples around the world, information needs to be provided to the parents of this embryo and their approval needs to be received before any treatment or research can occur. In addition, when a couple tries to have a child through IVF, multiple embryos can be used to try and be successful; the embryos have already been fertilised and if they were not to be used for medical purposes, they would need to be discarded nonetheless. Despite what a person’s religion may believe, it depends …show more content…
This process uses allogeneic stem cell transplants from the sibling of the patient. Although her embryo was not used for stem cell therapy, she was conceived purely to provide stem cell transplants, blood and eventually her kidney. This form of treatment also suffers criticism from ethics. In cases like Anna, she did not have a choice but to provide for her sister. This takes away a certain lifestyle from a child and although it isn’t explicitly stealing away a life like in the case of embryonic cells, it takes away the ability to live like a normal child. A saviour sibling like this suffers from a range of medical issues as well. It can be argued that this is also taking away the life from a child and people like Anna Fitzgerald will have to be cautious for the rest of their life because of their delicate health. This notion of saviour siblings can either work out for the family and their existing sibling or can go downwards and be unsuccessful. This inflicts psychological impacts on the child and the whole family if it doesn’t turn out the expected way. Overall, saviour siblings can be extremely helpful and potentially lifesaving to their elder sibling. But the amount of risks and side effects may overthrow the number of positives in this case; however this view like with embryonic cells is different between various