Wednesday, July 18, 2001
|
Wednesday, July 18, 2001 |
|
Destroying people to save people . . .? By AMY RILEY It probably was a surprise to few last week when scientists at the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Norfolk, Va., spoke publicly about being the first group in the world to create embryos for the sole purpose of harvesting stem cells for use in medical research. The scientific community, Congress, President Bush, bioethicists, and religious leaders had been debating the merits of providing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research for months. The public announcement by the Jones Institute researchers brought the discussion to a whole new moral and ethical level, a place that many people believe has crossed the line. According to published reports, the Jones researchers collected 162 eggs from 12 women who gave informed consent and were compensated for the procedure. The eggs were artificially inseminated with donor sperm. From the 162 eggs, 50 embryos were produced. Forty embryos were then destroyed, and the coveted stem cells were harvested and maintained in a culture. Up until last week, the only sources of embryonic stem cells were the donated, unused frozen embryos of couples seeking treatment for infertility that were already slated to be destroyed. To create a human embryo for the sole purpose of destroying it for its valuable stem cells was believed by most in the scientific community to be unethical, including those in the National Institutes of Health, who are seeking federal funding for stem cell research, but under strict federal guidelines and regulations for acceptable practices. Ironically, the Jones Institute's own ethics committee concluded that it was their "duty to provide humankind with the best understanding of human development," apparently by destroying it. These are the biomedical issues of our time. For some, embryonic stem cell research represents the worst of mankind's potential to violate the sanctity of human life. For others, particularly patients with cancer, diabetes, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries, and Alzheimer's, stem cell research represents the hope for a restorative cure. Essentially this has become a battle of wills between those with religious beliefs and those without, between those who believe that life begins at conception and those who believe that life, and any inherent "rights," begins at birth. Fundamentally, doesn't so much in our collective conscience eventually come down to these differences? Leading the call for stem cell research are some influential people who capture the hearts of the American public. Michael J. Fox is the spokesperson for Parkinson's research, Alex P. Keaton, the lovable teenaged economic prodigy of wholesome TV (back in the day of wholesome TV). Christopher Reeve is a Superman who used to be capable of leaping tall buildings in a single bound before he fell victim to a riding accident that left him paralyzed. Now he is a withered body with a boundless spirit who uses his position of influence to lobby for funded research in treating spinal cord injuries. Ronald Reagan is dying from Alzheimer's. We can only speculate as to what his voice would have lent to this debate as he no longer has the capacity to tell us. Try as I might to put myself in to the shoes of someone who is suffering from a debilitating injury or life threatening disease, I cannot. "There, but for the grace of God, go I." But as I search my soul, and my understanding of God and humanity, I cannot help but believe that this is an abomination to our Creator. Inevitably, I find myself drawn back to the garden, the very origin of sinful mankind, and in my mind's eye, I gaze upon the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and on the "forbidden fruit," the knowledge of which would make us "like God." Surely, He did not mean for us to do this, to eat of this fruit. When I think about the implications of science creating life, in a process absent of human emotion and devoid of any moral underpinnings, for the purpose of destroying that life for the "greater good" of medical progress, no matter how noble or heart-rending the cause, I am swept by a wave of ominous foreboding. It is as though you can hear the Earth moaning on its axis. It is as though you can see God, and feel the tidal swish of His robes, as He turns his back to humankind. Consider that 50 embryos were created and 40 were destroyed for the limited, and limitless, role that they could play. Each of us began as an embryo. What other roles might those 40 have played, and what have we missed of their contribution to mankind? [Your comments are welcome: AmyRileyOpEd@aol.com.]
|
||