How Does Bioethics Affect the Development of Stem Cell Research?

Stem cell research provides significant promise for understanding central mechanisms of human development and the optimism for modern treatments for diseases like Parkinson's disease, diabetes, spinal cord injury, and myocardial infarction. Human stem cell has increasingly raised both political and ethical controversies. The root of pluripotent stem cells lines from embryos and oocytes is burdened with disagreements concerning the start of human personhood. Recently, the debate of the bioethics of human stem cell research has changed from disagreements over the origin of human embryonic stem cells to issues related to the ethical use of stem cells in clinical research. This paper seeks to examine how bioethics affects the development of stem cell research.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Human stem cells provide stimulating opportunities for scientific developments and modern therapies. Despite this benefit, it increases complex moral and policy matters. Such issues require thorough discussion together with scientific problems to guarantee that stem cell research is performed in a morally acceptable way. Embryonic stem cells contain indefinite regenerative capability and can equally produce any body tissue. In that sense, these cells hold significant promise for the treatment of degenerative diseases that affect the humans. Nevertheless, it is important to understand that the derivation of these cells, as well as the potential for waste, have increased several ethical concerns (Gilbert 100). One of the common dangers in the subject matter is that the ethical concerns pressure to weaken public funding for embryonic stem cells. Because of this fact, much of the work and experiments have been left out for the private sector, hence excluding the publics' capacity to review research options, practices, and successfully solve the very ethical issues that should be given the priority.

The major bioethical issues linked with stem cells comprise their origin and use for research. Over the past years, there have been remarkable issues concerning the gathering and use of somatic stem cells acquired from abandoned fetuses and umbilical cord blood (Hyun 72). Currently, the most intense argument has paid more attention to the origin of human embryonic stem cells (hES). Unquestionably, several ethical issues are starting to surround the source and use of other human embryonic stem cells that can distinguish into all forms of human tissue. Indeed, in the coming future, as the stem cell field advances closer to the treatment centre, more issues that are ethical are expected to occur. Such matters will concern the clinical change of basic stem cell knowledge into practically safe, accessible, and effective patient therapies.

Back in the year 2005, former U.S President Bush permitted Federal National Institutes of Health financing for stem cell research. This funding was necessarily at the time because it allowed scholars to treat degenerative diseases. President's Bush justification for the policy was that the embryos from which the lines were generated had been destroyed. Therefore, permitting research to be carried out on the stem cells would consent to benefits out of the damages. Under the reign of President Obama, federal funding was also availed to perform research with hESC lines. However, federal funding was now allowed for the production of embryos specifically for analysis.

Stem cell research is broadly common in familiar parts of the world. It is important to note that the policies governing stem cell research vary considerably from one country to the other. Several factors play a great deal in the manner these policies are regulated in diverse nations. For instance, religious presence in some countries undermines the progress of stem cell research. The U.S restricts the distribution of federal financial support for embryonic stem cell research, thereby leaving this opportunity mostly to the private sector. The U.S government instead offers support to a small percentage of pre-2001 stem cell lines generated from embryos available following in vitro fertilization. In other parts of the world, for instance, Canada, the rules concerning stem cell research are flexible (Murnaghan 1). Back in the year 2005, the government of Canada provided a massive boost of 5 million dollars to support research and experiments in the use of stem cells. The funding aimed to help restore the destroyed cells in the lungs and heart. In Italy and Germany, the rules and regulations concerning stem cell research are severe. In that case, an investigation that involves embryonic stem cells is not allowed. A ban on stem cell research in these countries was lifted several years ago. Other countries like South Korea and Australia also have different regulations concerning the subject.

The ethical explanations for permitting deidentified biological materials to be employed for researching without permission do not necessarily hold for embryo research. For instance, one justification for authorizing the use of deidentified materials revolves around the fact that ethical risks are minimal (Parham & Bernard 206). This is an implication that there can never be a breach of privacy, which the primary issue in this mode of research. Another rationale is that individuals would not take exception to having their materials used in that approach if they were given a chance to participate. However, this theory does not necessarily count in the field of embryo research.

While cell-based experimental research progresses, it is vital that codes of social justice be given priority in every country involved in the study. The new measures may comprise productively reconfiguring the already available models of licensing, intellectual property, as well as public financing to promote extensive social admission for stem cell treatments. Attaining social justice may engage appealing to regulatory and other agencies to entail a more substantial involvement of society and patient supporters in the running of the research (Hyun 75). Taking care of bioethics of how (instead of whether) to carry on with stem cell research urges that we fight these and the other disturbing questions on the subject. There are many tasks ahead for the global community of clinicians, researchers, bioethicists, and patient advocates.

Conclusion

It is evident that the debate over embryo destruction remains far from gaining suitable solution for both the critics and supporters. However, two current developments have assisted significantly to reduce the heated controversy over hES cell study. The initial development is the introduction of human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS). This revolves around the dermal fibroblasts that are hereditarily engineered to perform the same way as hES cells. The second development is the well-known standpoint introduced during the Obama regime concerning hES cell study. Conclusively, the major bioethical concern today leans more on how stem cell research should be carried out, rather than whether scientists or scholars should carry out the study. While the adoption of modern technology is inevitable and the likely for abuse is high, new policies should be introduced and government must partake in the topic to ensure a safe direction for research.

Works Cited

Gilbert David. "The future of human embryonic stem cell research: addressing ethical conflict with responsible scientific research." Med Sci Monit, vol. 10. No. 5, 2004: 99-103.

Hyun Insoo. "The Bioethics of Stem Cell Research and Therapy." J Clin Invest, vol 120, no.1 2010: 71-75.

Michael J. Sandel. D. phil. "Embryo Ethics - The Moral Logic of Stem-Cell Research." New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 3, 2004.

Murnaghan Ian. "Stem Cell Research around the World." Explore Stem Cells. April 25, 2018. http://www.explorestemcells.co.uk/stemcellresearcharoundworld.html

Parham Lindsay & Bernard Lo. "Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research." Endocrine Society, vol. 30, no. 3, 2009: 204-213.