Kantian Ethics And The Hesc Research: A Philosophical Exploration

The scientific reports on the successful use of Human Embryonic Stem cells to cure many sicknesses as provoked a long-standing controversy about the ethics of research involving human embryos. This controversy arises from sharply differing moral views regarding the use of embryos for research purposes. Indeed, an earnest international scholarly debate continues till today over the ethical, legal, and medical issues that arise in this arena. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) had given a moral guideline that ethical decisions should be made by considering the nature of the act itself, not its consequences. Furthermore, Kant has warned that persons (autonomous agents) have a special moral worth or dignity, which is the basis for the respect that is owed to them. Thus, respect for persons, means never using persons merely as means to our ends, but always treating them also as ends in themselves. Some philosophers like Richard Doerflinger, Michael Novak, Gilbert Meilaender, and Robert P. George have used the Kantian formula of humanity to criticize the argument that spare IVF embryos can be used for stem cell research given their inevitable death and thus lack of properties for future life. However, the purpose of this paper is to take a critical look at the Human Embryonic Stem cells subject matter to investigate the concept of “personhood’, with the maxim of ‘never treating a person as a means’. This paper argues that if we accepts the definition of a person to possess capacities such as ‘rational’ ‘will’ and ‘self-determination’, then IVF embryos is not a person and can therefore be researched upon, used to derive human embryonic stem cells. Hence, Human Embryonic Stem cells research can be carried out within the ambiance of Kant Categorical Imperative without moral conflict.

Stem cell legislation and its impact on the geographic preferences of stem cell researchers

Proponents describe stem Cell Replacement Therapy and related technologies to be a significant step forward for medicine. However, due to the inherent ethical problems in human Embryonic Stem Cell Research (hESC), it is strictly regulated around the world. The US has passed at the federal and state level, both supportive and restrictive laws over the years. The changing legislative environment at the state and federal levels has created a situation whereby researchers have to choose whether and where to carry out this research. By exploiting the temporal and spatial heterogeneity and legislative shocks, we assess if the affected scientists have voted with their feet, leaving the state or country imposing restrictive rules and whether hESC research has clustered geographically. We find that most of the hESC research is carried out in supportive states, and significant legislative changes have had a minor but noticeable effect on relocation choices. Most importantly, the research has moved to supportive states. This result suggests that several state-level interventions (supportive), which were opposed to federal laws (restrictive), have counteracted each other.

Isolation, Culture, and Functional Characterization of Human Embryonic Stem Cells: Current Trends and Challenges

Human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) hold great potential for the treatment of various degenerative diseases. Pluripotent hESCs have a great ability to undergo unlimited self-renewal in culture and to differentiate into all cell types in the body. The journey of hESC research is not that smooth, as it has faced several challenges which are limited to not only tumor formation and immunorejection but also social, ethical, and political aspects. The isolation of hESCs from the human embryo is considered highly objectionable as it requires the destruction of the human embryo. The issue was debated and discussed in both public and government platforms, which led to banning of hESC research in many countries around the world. The banning has negatively affected the progress of hESC research as many federal governments around the world stopped research funding. Afterward, some countries lifted the ban and allowed the funding in hESC research, but the damage has already been done on the progress of research. Under these unfavorable conditions, still some progress was made to isolate, culture, and characterize hESCs using different strategies. In this review, we have summarized various strategies used to successfully isolate, culture, and characterize hESCs. Finally, hESCs hold a great promise for clinical applications with proper strategies to minimize the teratoma formation and immunorejection and better cell transplantation strategies.

Religious People Are Against Scientific Technology

There is a myth that religious people do not like technology, whether it is the Internet, social media, or medical technologies. In fact, religious people’s concerns with many technologies mirror those of nonreligious people. As for social media, for instance, religious people fear what these technologies can do to relationships. And yet religious people support these technologies for the ways they can grow, strengthen, and connect communities of faith. While religious people are not unique in their concerns about many technologies, there are a few that concern religious people, in particular: reproductive genetic technologies (RGTs), in vitro fertilization (IVF), and human embryonic stem-cell (hESC) research. Biomedical technologies, specifically those related to “human enhancement,” tend to intersect directly with faith and can cause tension with religious groups. In other words, people of faith have theological concerns about these technologies because they seem to have implications for who God is and who human beings are and what it means to have a good life.

Brüstle v. Greenpeace: Implications for Commercialisation of Translational Stem Cell Research

The lack of consensus on a common definition of the term ‘embryo’ has resulted in legal uncertainty affecting the permissibility of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research and the commercialisation prospects and patenting of inventions of hESC origin in the eu. The Brüstle v. Greenpeace case, which by providing a very broad definition of a human embryo restricts the patentability of hESC-based inventions, aims at harmonising the patenting practices regarding interpretation of Article 6.2.c of Directive 98/44/ec. It fills the gaps in national laws by providing binding interpretation guidelines for national courts. As currently no marketing authorisations have been granted to hESC-based products, implications of this judgment for translational hESC research together with other barriers to commercialisation of such research need to be analysed. In addition, whether the main obstacles relate to patenting restrictions or whether something else in the innovation system is impeding the market entry of these innovative products is discussed.

Science and politics in the regulation of human embryonic stem-cell research in Brazil

This case study deals with the regulation of human embryonic stem-cell (hESC) research in Brazil. It aims to analyze the process that led to the authorization, in 2005, of the use of stem cells obtained from so-called supernumerary embryos for purposes of research and therapy. We argue that the pro-research lobby in Brazil had considerable success because it framed the issue by referring to Brazil’s peculiar policy background in the fields of assisted reproduction and embryo research. Moreover, this group of actors strategically avoided associating hESC research with abortion, highlighting the humanitarian aspects of this kind of research, rather than the motto of freedom of scientific research. Finally, it was able to rely on the judgment of a fairly progressive Supreme Court, which was also sensitive to public opinion at a time of ‘court activism’ or the ‘judicialization of politics’ in Brazil.

Deliberating or Dithering? Ireland and Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Disagreement about matters of public policy concerned with moral issues is inevitable in pluralist democracies. One approach to the resolution of moral conflicts in society is the concept of deliberative democracy, which emphasises the process or procedure which ultimately allows a political decision to be reached. The Republic of Ireland effectively has no legislative framework regulating human embryonic stem cell research (hESC research). This article proposes that Irish policymakers establish a procedural framework, similar to that used in other European democracies, to allow the development of appropriate regulations pertaining to hESC research in Ireland. In particular the article will consider how a three-tier model of procedural regulation has been used to achieve certainty in the area of hESC research in the United Kingdom and Germany and how this model might be applied to Ireland.

Human embryonic stem cell research in Ireland: Ethical and legal issues

The paper examines the ethical and legal background to the current debate in the Republic of Ireland on the use of human embryos and embryonic stem cells (hESC) for research. How should public policy be formed to balance the potential health benefits of such research against the moral values of 21st century Irish society? The legislature has failed to address the constitutional ambiguities that have contributed to the current uncertainty as to the legal position of hESC research in Ireland. In view of the challenges posed by hESC research, it is argued that an appropriate regulatory framework should be adopted in Ireland, which will bring a degree of certainty as to what is and is not permitted. In adopting such a framework, it is suggested that hESC research should be permitted on donated supernumerary embryos up to day-14 post fertilisation.