Ethics and Stem Cell Research
The University of Maryland Medical Center defines a stem cell as a generic cell that can make exact copies of itself indefinitely (UMMC,2016). Stem cells are known for their ability to transform themselves into various tissues such as heart muscle, brain tissue, liver tissue and kidney tissues. There are two types of stem cells; the first one is known as an Embryonic stem cells, these are removed from fetuses that have been aborted or from fertilized eggs that are left over from in vitro fertilization. In other words, these cells are derived from embryos (NIH, 2015). Embryonic stem cells can produce almost every tissue in the body and are known for their ability to cultivate quickly (NIH,2015). …show more content…
In addition, stem cells may be used by scientist to better understand why some cells develop abnormally thus preventing birth defects and cancer. Stem cells have created major controversy, those who oppose stem cell research state that stem cell research is wrong because it involves the destruction of human embryos and others consider stem cell research as a dehumanizing practice which can lead to embryo farms and cloned babies. Is it acceptable for us to use embryos so that they may be used for biomedical research and clinical purposes? This paper will examine utilitarian and non-consequentialist theories regarding this ethical dilemma of stem cell research. Utilitarianism deems an action morally correct if the action is the one that maximizes utility and is most beneficial to the greatest number of people (IEP, 1995). As a utilitarian one would argue that stem cell research is in fact a moral thing to do. According to the theory the right thing to do is the one that benefits and provides …show more content…
Utilitarianism states that an action is considered moral when it provides that greatest amount of benefits to the greatest amount of people (IEP, 1995), however what gives us the right to determine what we do with another human being, furthermore what makes us qualified to determine whether or not someone is worthy having an opportunity to live their life, an embryo with potential may be disposed of if it is not used on someone who needs it, but does this unquestionably make stem cell research a moral action? Kant’s non-consequentialist theory states that what we ought to do does not depend on the consequences of our actions (SIUE, ND). Individuals are free to do as they please which means that a woman can choose to abort her baby or participate in in-vitro fertilization, however this theory is false because Kant also state that all humans must be treated as an “ends of himself” and must not be used object of means, furthermore, non-consequentialist view the life of a human sacred. Stem cell research obviously interferes with the life of an embryo and stops their natural process of aging regardless of the fact that it is helping save the life of someone, helping save someone’s life by killing another individual does not make the action moral, in fact it is regarded as highly
The University of Maryland Medical Center defines a stem cell as a generic cell that can make exact copies of itself indefinitely (UMMC,2016). Stem cells are known for their ability to transform themselves into various tissues such as heart muscle, brain tissue, liver tissue and kidney tissues. There are two types of stem cells; the first one is known as an Embryonic stem cells, these are removed from fetuses that have been aborted or from fertilized eggs that are left over from in vitro fertilization. In other words, these cells are derived from embryos (NIH, 2015). Embryonic stem cells can produce almost every tissue in the body and are known for their ability to cultivate quickly (NIH,2015). …show more content…
In addition, stem cells may be used by scientist to better understand why some cells develop abnormally thus preventing birth defects and cancer. Stem cells have created major controversy, those who oppose stem cell research state that stem cell research is wrong because it involves the destruction of human embryos and others consider stem cell research as a dehumanizing practice which can lead to embryo farms and cloned babies. Is it acceptable for us to use embryos so that they may be used for biomedical research and clinical purposes? This paper will examine utilitarian and non-consequentialist theories regarding this ethical dilemma of stem cell research. Utilitarianism deems an action morally correct if the action is the one that maximizes utility and is most beneficial to the greatest number of people (IEP, 1995). As a utilitarian one would argue that stem cell research is in fact a moral thing to do. According to the theory the right thing to do is the one that benefits and provides …show more content…
Utilitarianism states that an action is considered moral when it provides that greatest amount of benefits to the greatest amount of people (IEP, 1995), however what gives us the right to determine what we do with another human being, furthermore what makes us qualified to determine whether or not someone is worthy having an opportunity to live their life, an embryo with potential may be disposed of if it is not used on someone who needs it, but does this unquestionably make stem cell research a moral action? Kant’s non-consequentialist theory states that what we ought to do does not depend on the consequences of our actions (SIUE, ND). Individuals are free to do as they please which means that a woman can choose to abort her baby or participate in in-vitro fertilization, however this theory is false because Kant also state that all humans must be treated as an “ends of himself” and must not be used object of means, furthermore, non-consequentialist view the life of a human sacred. Stem cell research obviously interferes with the life of an embryo and stops their natural process of aging regardless of the fact that it is helping save the life of someone, helping save someone’s life by killing another individual does not make the action moral, in fact it is regarded as highly