Is stem cell research morally permissible?

1. Is stem cell research morally permissible? Michael Lacewing enquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk

2. Creating embryonic stem cells • Embryonic stem cell lines are created by removing an inner cell mass from a five- to seven-day-old embryo, a procedure which kills the embryo. • When properly nurtured, the cells are able to replicate themselves, creating what is called a stem cell line that provides continuing opportunities for research. The undifferentiated cells have the potential to become any type of cell - brain, heart, liver, bone – so they are called ‘pluripotent’ cells. • The embryos used are surplus ones created by IVF treatment. • Research on stem cells is almost entirely on embryonic stem cells. Recently, scientists have managed to find other sources for stem cells.

5. The nature of the argument • The presumption is that it is morally right, and good, to help human beings where we can • But, we also think, not by any means • So the question is: is there a good reason not to help people in this way?

6. The argument from potential • Embryos have a right to life because they will become a person with a right to life if allowed to develop • But: • Sperm and egg prior to conception have this potential, if allowed to conjoin • Does potential matter? A student, who has the potential to become a teacher, is not put in charge of lessons until trained as a teacher; you can’t spend money you don’t have yet • The embryos in stem cell research won’t develop unless implanted - so it doesn’t have the potential to develop on its own

7. The soul and the sanctity of life • If people have souls, when does the soul and body come together? Traditional Catholic doctrine: at conception - so the embryo is sacred, as all human life is, straight away • But: • Two-thirds of embryos spontaneously aborted • Some forms of contraception, including some forms of the pill, do not prevent conception, but prevent the embryo implanting in the uterus wall • Until 14 days old, the embryo may split into two, becoming identical twins - one soul or two?

8. Sanctity and the right to life • So are embryos sacred? Do they have a right to life? Are these two questions the same? • Why do human beings have a right to life? Is it something that distinguishes us from animals? • Soul • Reason • Language • Emotional experience • Morality • Just ‘being human’

9. Dividing people up • Apart from souls and ‘being human’, all other criteria are possessed by some human beings and not others, e.g. severe mental disability, senile dementia, permanent vegetative state • Yet we don’t think it is permissible to kill them for the benefit of others • Sentience: primitive consciousness of perception, pleasure, pain • This begins around 20 weeks, so embryos don’t have right to life. • Many animals are sentient - do they have a right to life?

10. Alternatives • Alternatives for embryo: unless IVF is prohibited, it will die anyway • Alternatives to stem cell research: does it matter if there is no other way of producing these benefits? • Not if it is wrong to use embryos - we wouldn’t use adults in this way

11. Does the source of stem cells matter? • Stem cells can now be extracted from amniotic fluid, and most recently, from veins removed in surgery; would it be permissible to use these? • ‘Induced pluripotent cells’ are cells that have been reprogrammed to become stem cells • But should we stop research on embryonic stem cells meanwhile?

12. The importance of the debate • Even if the answer is that it is morally permissible to use embryos in stem cell research, it would be wrong to do so lightly and without due consideration • Embryos are alive • Embryos are human (of human material)