Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword or section
Like this
3Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Are We Killing The Weak To Heal The Sick?: Federally Funded Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Are We Killing The Weak To Heal The Sick?: Federally Funded Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,569|Likes:
Published by alo_konsen

More info:

Published by: alo_konsen on Apr 30, 2011
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

12/08/2012

pdf

text

original

 
507
 
NOTEARE WE KILLING THE WEAK TOHEAL THE SICK?:
FEDERALLYFUNDED EMBRYONIC STEM CELLRESEARCH
 Alo H. Konsen
 
Medical professionals have long sought effective treat-ments for debilitating diseases and injuries. Until recently, re-searchers had little concrete hope of significantly helping peo-
ple afflicted with serious conditions like Parkinson’s disease,diabetes, cancer, multiple sclerosis, birth defects, heart disease,and spinal cord injuries. Roughly three years ago, everythingchanged when scientists made an extremely controversial break-through in the field of human stem cell research. Implantingthese newly isolated unspecialized cells into sick or injured hu-man tissue holds out the hope of miracle medical cures. Someresearchers harvest stem cells by destroying human embryos,and these scientists now want access to federal funds to supporttheir work. By reviewing the history of stem cell research, ana-lyzing the state of applicable medical research law, and apply-ing scientific and philosophical considerations to the debate,this Note will demonstrate that federally funded human embry-onic stem cell research is illegal, immoral, and unnecessary.
I. STEM CELL RESEARCH 101
In 1998, two research teams figured out how to isolate andculture stem cells from human embryos. John Gearhart, a pro-fessor of obstetrics/gynecology and physiology at Johns Hop- 
J.D. Candidate at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.
 
 
508
 HEALTH MATRIX 
 
[Vol. 12:507
kins University led one team
1
, which obtained its stem cellsfrom the gonad tissue of aborted fetuses.
2
James A. Thomson, aUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison developmental biologist, ledthe other team
3
, which extracted stem cells from excess em-bryos created by In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) clinics.
4
This teampublished its results first,
5
and ignited a firestorm of contro-versy.The rest of the scientific community soon realized the im-plica
tions of the researchers’ discovery. Medical authoritiesforesaw possible breakthrough treatments for previously un-treatable diseases, given enough time, funding, and embryonicstem cells suitable for implantation. Pro-life advocates immedi-ately objected to the research because it destroyed human em-bryos. Sympathetic pro-lifers in Congress moved to restrict hu-man embryonic stem cell research (ESCR), setting off a legalbattle of national proportions.To properly tackle the legal issues surrounding the ESCRdebate, one must have a basic working knowledge of humanembryology and cell development.Totipotent stem cells, present only in the first four days af-ter conception, have the ability to differentiate into all 210 typesof human tissue.
6
A totipotent cell (e.g., a human zygote) hasthe inherent potential to develop into an individual adult organ-ism. As its name suggests, its potential is total.
7
 Approximately four days after conception, the rapidly di-viding and multiplying totipotent cells begin specializing.
8
Theybecome pluripotent, that is, capable of developing into many(but not all) kinds of tissue.
9
At this point the preborn human is
1
Press Release, Johns Hopkins Med. Inst., Hopkins Research Team CulturesLong-Awaited Human Embryonic Stem Cells (Nov. 5, 1998),
 
http://hopkins.med.jhu.edu/press/1998/NOVEMBER/981105A.HTM.
2
N
AT
S
I
NSTS
.
OF
H
EALTH
, U.S. D
EP
T OF
H
EALTH AND
H
UMAN
S
ERVS
., S
TEM
C
ELLS
: A P
RIMER
,
 
http://www.nih.gov/news/stemcell/primer.htm (May 2000) [here-inafter NIH P
RIMER
].
3
Terry Devitt,
Wisconsin Scientists Culture Elusive Embryonic Stem Cells
,W
IS
. W
EEK
, Nov. 5, 1998, http://www.news.wisc.edu/wisweek/view.msql?id=3327.
4
NIH P
RIMER
,
supra
note 2.
5
James A. Thomson et al.,
 Embryonic Stem Cell Lines Derived from Human Blastocysts
, 282 S
CI
. 1145 (1998).
6
 
See
NIH P
RIMER
,
supra
note 2.
7
 
 Id.
8
 
 Id.
9
 
 Id.
 
 
 
2002]
 ARE WE KILLING THE WEAK TO HEAL THE SICK?
509
known as a blastocyst, an eight- or sixteen-celled embryo thathas not yet successfully implanted i
n the mother’s uterus.
10
Instate case law, blastocysts that have not yet implanted them-selves in the uterus are often labeled with the medically impre-cise legal term “pre-embryo.”
11
Blastocyst implantation occurson about the fifth day after conception.Shortly after this point, embryos have three layers of tissue:the ectoderm (leading to production of hair and nerve tissue),endoderm (producing lungs, liver and gut endothelium) andmesoderm (producing blood, bone and striated muscle).
12
Fur-ther along in the developmental process, pluripotent cells be-come multipotent, giving rise to cells within just one narrowcategory (e.g., certain multipotent stem cells become whiteblood cells, red blood cells, and platelets).
13
 Until the stem cell researchers’ breakthrough, it was widelyaccepted that after cells from one of the three embryonic layersmatured into adult tissue, those cells could not be transformedinto a type originating in one of the other two embryonic celllayers. For example, cells of ectodermic origin could not bechanged into cells identical to those of endodermic or meso-dermic origin. The researchers from Johns Hopkins and Wis-consin shattered that assumption.Unfortunately for researchers, Congress found out that thetwo teams were forced to destroy each embryo from which theyextracted their stem cells. A peer-reviewed article publishedalmost simultaneously with the researchers’ press releasesstated, “creating [embryonic stem] cell lines requires research-ers to destroy an embryo.”
14
Congress stepped in to prohibitfederal funding for this research, the Executive Branch ob- jected, and the current controversy began.
10
See id.
11
Hecht v. Superior Court, 16 Cal. App. 4th 836, 849 (Ct. App. 1993); A.Z. v.B.Z., 725 N.E.2d 1051,1052 n.1 (Mass. 2000); J.B. v. M.B., 751 A.2d 613, 614 n.1(N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2000); Planned Parenthood of Middle Tenn. v. Sundquist,38 S.W.3d 1, 17 (Tenn. 2000).
12
Letter from Rev. Msgr. Dennis N. Schnurr, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, to NIH Office of Science Policy n.11 (Jan. 31, 2000), http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/issues/bioethic/comments.htm.
13
NIH P
RIMER
 , supra
note 2.
14
Sabine Steghaus-Kovac,
 Ethical Loophole Closing Up for Stem Cell Re-searchers
, 286 S
CI
. 31 (1999).

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->