In this essay, I will be discussing the divider between science and morals in terms of the

use of embryonic stem cells. In my opinion, embryonic stem cells should not be used for
scientific research as it is a breach of moral values, religious values and it is crossing the
line of what science is allowed to do. There are many varied opinions on this matter and
this essay will be addressing all of the potential opinions people may hold…

By now, it is evident to most people that science and moral arguments are different in
nearly all matters however in terms of the use of embryonic stem cells, the matter is a
little more complicated. Many ethical issues stand with the creation of an embryo just
for science and many religious issues stand with therapeutic cloning.

As the situation is more complicated, policies and legislation are being formulated in
many countries to regulate their derivation. The United Kingdom was the first country
to pass a law governing the use of embryonic stem cells for scientific research. The
European Science Foundation has also established a committee to make an inventory of
the positions taken by the governments of countries withing Europe on this issue. This
is an indication that stem cell research is more favoured in the developed countries
rather than the developing countries.

The main reason why scientists use embryonic stem cells over adult stem cells is
because they are pluripotent; they are not restricted in their capabilities. To this point,
many would argue that it the use of adult stem cells is more appropriate as the use of
embryonic stem cells would be pushing the boundary line.

Within 5 days of fertilisation, the embryo has to be aborted if it is to be used for stem-
cell usage and so essentially, it is destroyed. Many religious issues are expected to
orientate around this act; for example, the purposeful ending of life could be considered
as murder or breach of the position as humans. Studies conducted by Stem Cell
Foundations show that germ cells have common properties with embryonic stem cells
and so the question is raised – why can’t germ cells be used instead of embryonic stem
cells?

Another reason why embryonic stem cell is used over adult stem cells is because adult
stem cells present in the brain, skeletal muscle, umbilical cord blood and the heart are
hard to extract. Adult stem cells found in the bone marrow are multipotent meaning
they are restricted in their actions. In conclusion, stem cells can be extracted from the
brain from adults, yet this is a risky process and embryonic stem cells have more
potential.

Another potential reason for the use of embryonic stem cells is they could possibly be
used to understand the causes of early pregnancy loss, aspects of embryonic ageing and
the failure of pregnancy in older women after their menopause has occurred. Another
use of embryonic stem cells could be to research possible toxic effects of new drugs.

Stem cell therapy could also be used to treat diabetes, Parkinson’s Disease, stroke,
arthritis, multiple sclerosis, heart failure and spinal cord lesions. The study span for this
topic is very limited because only some countries around the world allow stem cells
because of ethical reasons. Therapeutic cloning can also be cloned but this topic is
normally shunned due to questions on its ethicality. Despite this, stem-cell research is
increasing due to the number of donated embryos increasing – this is an important
determinant of success. The system is not properly developed as only IVF (In Vitro
Fertilisation) has been used so far.

One of the most important points raised is what is the ontological status of embryonic
stem cells and should they be considered to human life or not? Also, another common
question raised is when does life begin? Many people believe that life begins at
fertilisation and so it would be wrong to use an embryo for scientific studies however
scientists have varied opinions.

To oppose the previous argument, some might argue that embryonic stem cells are
embryos; this is because although stem cells themselves cannot develop a human being,
they might if they were built into a background able to make extra-embryonic tissues
necessary for the implanting and nutrition of an embryo. In general, most people agree
that is unreasonable to see stem cells equivalent to an embryo – after all, a nucleus may
become an embryo after nuclear transplantation in an oocyte.

As it is evident, there is a big divider between science and moral as considerable

differences of opinion exist with regard to the ontological and moral status of an
embryo and stem cell usage. In simple terms – there is an overlapping consensus
between science and morals – one might see the embryo as a person as it will grow into
a person whereas another might see the embryo as a non-person ought not to be
attributed any moral status at all. In recent debates, many people have also used the
Human Life argument which addresses moral, ethical and religious issues in defence of
not using embryos for scientific studies.

In conclusion, I believe that the view that research with pre-implantation embryos
should be categorically forbidden is based on shaky premises and would be difficult to
reconcile wide social acceptance of this medical practice. The dominant view in ethics is
that the instrumental use of pre-implantation embryos in accordance with their moral
value cannot be justified under most conditions yet people’s opinions are constantly
evolving.

Reference:
Oxford Academic: https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/18/4/672/596542?
login=true