Stem Cell Research: The question is
whether the ends justify the means

In an adept work of compromise, President George W. Bush both approved of and limited research on stem cells earlier this month. The, at least politically astute, decision placed the president in a moral gray area in which conflicting advice abounds. Stem cells may hold the key to repairing damaged heart muscle tissue after a heart attack, replacing destroyed neurons in the brains of persons suffering from Parkinson’s disease, and transplanting insulin-producing cells into the pancreas of a person with diabetes. In fact, these three examples are just the beginning of the potential good that can come from stem cells. The research may lead to dozens of cures for chronic diseases, relieving untold suffering of millions.

While no one close to the research doubts that stem cells hold out the promise of miracle cures for a wide range of diseases, the question is whether the end result therapies justify the means of using human embryos in research. Bush’s decision of August 9 is an attempt to have it both ways. The president would like to get the benefits of research derived from embryonic stem cells, while not using government funds on the initial step in the research which destroys a viable human embryo. The essential tension is between the desire to relieve suffering and the desire to value all human life. A stem cell research primer is needed to follow the debate.

Stem cells are a type of cell that has the potential to develop into any human organ. Properly cultured, a stem cell can grow into brain neurons, muscles, cartilage. Stem cells have the potential to become any specialized human cell. Once created, the stem cells are then grown and cultured in a stem cell line. The stem cell line continues to grow, creating new embryonic stem cells without the need to destroy more embryos.

There are three sources of stem cells—week-old embryos, aborted fetuses, and adult cell donors. Federal funds had been funding research only on adult stem cells. President Bush, following a Clinton Administration ruling, expanded the use of federal funds to include existing stem cell lines. This means that the federal government will not fund the portion of the research that actually destroyed the human embryos. Instead, Bush’s ruling set up a set of criteria saying that federal dollars can only go to stem cell lines which existed by 9 p.m. EDT on August 9, 2001. Further, those embryonic stem cells must have been obtained with the informed consent of the parent donors, who also must not have been paid for the donation. This list of criteria ensures that government funds do not go to ending the life of an embryo. The criteria also at least postpone the time when a market develops for human embryos. Following the Bush decision, it is now much more financially sound to use cells from the existing 64 stem cell lines, which qualify for federal funding under the guidelines.

Where did the embryos come from to start with? Embryos for stem cell research were obtained from left over embryos created for use for in vitro fertilization (so called test tube babies). If you are not opposed to in vitro fertilization, then there is no reason to oppose stem cell research from the unused embryos, which are routinely destroyed. Yet, if you consider life to begin at conception, then embryonic research should be troubling to you. However, stem cell research on existing embryonic stem lines is not the battle ground, as it is too late to save the lives of the embryos used in creating the existing stem lines and Bush’s decision will help make destruction of more embryos financially unsound.

At this early stage, embryonic stem cell lines hold out great promise. But embryonic stem cells are not the only research option. I would hate to see this rush to fund embryonic stem cell research dampen the enthusiasm for work on adult stem cells. There are obstacles to adult stem cell research. The adult stem cells cannot currently be differentiated into all types of cells. However, adult stem cells are available without the ethical concerns (beyond the usual concern for informed consent of the donor) surrounding embryonic and fetal cells. Furthermore, the research on adult cells is initially more promising, as only the adult stem cells are currently understood well enough to be used in creating therapeutic treatments. Research on adult stem cells is considered ethical by a broad spectrum of Americans, and this research should be further encouraged through funding incentives.  

(The Rev. Frank Logue is pastor of King of Peace Episcopal Church, Kingsland.)