The Department of Health and Human Services maintained a moratorium on federal funding for research on embryos and fetuses, as well as in vitro fertilization, until President Clinton issued an executive order lifting it in 1993 (Scott p.153). However, Congress banned federal funding for human embryo research by adding legislation known as the Dickey-Wicker Amendment to every appropriations bill for the National Institutes of Health since 1995, making it impossible for the President to overturn the ban without also cutting the cash flow to the NIH (Scott p.154). This restriction remains in place today. On August 9, 2001, President Bush “clarifies which human embryonic stem cells can be used under federal funding rules” by stating that any lines derived from excess IVF blastocysts before his announcement are eligible for grants (Hopkins 2005). Then in 2009, President Obama lifted the 'made-before ' restriction for stem cell lines but maintained the ban on creation and destruction of embryos for research purposes (Madison.com 2009). With all these restrictions and complications, many scientists started to consider moving their research to countries with more liberal stem cell policies, such as Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom. To combat this potential brain drain and create jobs within their own borders, states began to enact laws promoting stem cell research. Most notable is California, who in 2004 pledged to spend $3 billion on stem cell research, and gave it
This executive order removed the barriers put in place by the Bush administration and allowed for federal funding for new stem cell lines to be created. However, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment was still at play. For example, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 was signed by President Obama on March 11, 2009 two days after the executive order. The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 still contained the Dickey-Wicker provision that “bans federal funding of research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death” (“Obama’s Stem Cell Policy…”). Due to this, the Congressional provision still prevented federal funding from creating new stem cell lines with many of the known methods for doing so. However, President Obama’s executive order does allow for the applying for funding into research involving the existing stem cell lines and further stem cell lines created using private funds or state level funding. As the publication “New Scientist” pointed out at the time, still “the ability to apply for federal funding for stem cell lines created in the private sector is a significant expansion of options over the limits imposed by President Bush, who restricted funding to the 21 viable stem cell lines that were created before he announced his decision in 2001” (Aldhous
Are embryonic stem cells the cure to many of the human body’s ailments, including defective organs and crippling diseases, or is their use a blatant disregard of human rights and the value of life? Thanks to the rapid advancements in this field, the potential benefits of stem cells are slowly becoming reality. However, embryonic stem cell research is an extremely divisive topic in the United States thanks to the ethical issues surrounding terminating embryos to harvest the stem cells. In response to this debate, Congress passed the Dickey-Wicker amendment in 1995 to prohibit federal funding of research that involved the destruction of embryos. President Bush affirmed this decision, but more recently President Obama lifted many of
The President’s Council on Bioethics published “Monitoring Stem Cell Research” in 2004. This report was written in response to President Bush’s comments regarding research of human stem cells on August 9, 2001. President Bush announced that he was going to make federal funding available for research that involved existing lines of stem cells that came from embryos. He is the first president to provide any type of financial support for the research of human stem cells. A Council was created with people who are educated in the field of stem cells to help monitor the research and to recommend guidelines and consider the ethical consequences that this research could create. This report is an “update” given
Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics takes a very firm stand against the use of federal funding to aid in embryonic stem cell research. This coalition was founded by 8 extensively educated medical professionals, with the majority of them having specialized backgrounds in ethics or bioethics. The basis of their stance on the argument lies with the legally recognized practice of informed consent that requires a physician to do no harm to a patient. Their argument is that embryonic stem cell research that requires the destruction of a human embryo for the greater good of medicine legally, morally, and ethically defies the informed consent practice.
For Embryonic Stem Cell research, the issue of the destruction of a human embryo fell to the Pro-Life, Pro-Choice issue (Monitoring 487). In addition to the controversy, the current leaders of the United States (at the time) stepped in with legislature either allowing or halting the federal funding opportunities for Embryonic Stem Cells. From executive orders, to Supreme Court cases, the stem cells had formed a new argument and dinner table conversation for many individuals of the United States (White). Through many forms of language that spoke volumes for the research advocated for one side or the other, federal funding for or against. The federal funding issue is arguably the only distinct roadblock for the research, as it is the only form of legislature in place for the research (Tauer 927). From the 1980s when the issue grew from fertilization assistant for an everyday family to the 2000s when speeches, party politics, and medical reform became an essential part of the Embryonic Stem Cells ability to do what they do best, cure. Through the new forms of language for this topic from executive orders to speeches and court cases, the topic was changing, without the growth in
In our government today Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President are all faced with making tough decisions for our country. These decisions are not only decided based off the constitution but the ideological shift as generations go on. Possibly one of the most controversial landmark decisions the government is currently being challenged with is the affair of abortion. In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States was presented the case of Roe v Wade. The ruling decided a person has the right to privacy protected by the due process clause of the 14th amendment. This gave women the right to decide to have an abortion, but only under regulations from the state. As a result of this case, scientific research was conducted on stem cells starting in 1978 when a scientist discovered stem cells in human cord blood. From 1981 to 1991 scientist tested stem cells in mice, hamsters, and later in primates. 1998 marked an important discovery of pluripotent stem cells in an embryo, which is where the problem lies between the morals and ethics of citizens and the politicians’ jobs to decide for the people what is right for stem cell research.
If the government does not adequately fund research on stem cells, it makes sense that large amounts of discoveries would be made. It is in the government's best interest to represent the country as a whole, which would not be possible by taking one specific side of the ethical debate. Certainly, there are major advantages, as well as major issues, with stem cell research, but the most critical area of dispute comes with the idea of reproductive cloning through stem
On August 9, 2001 President Bush announced that he would allow limited federal funding for embryonic stem cell research under certain conditions. Under Bush's new ruling only the 64 stem cell lines that were already in place before August 9 were to be funded. He said that the government would not fund further destruction of embryos to create more lines. Also stem cells could not be obtained from embryos created for that purpose or from the left over embryos from in-vitro fertilization. However, private sectors would be allowed to continue producing new lines through the destruction of embryos.
This year, eight million innocent lives will be lost due to cancer. (cdc.gov) Eight million lives. That is equivalent to the entire population of New York City being eradicated because of one ravaging disease. However, there is a way to prevent these deaths, and this way is embryonic stem cell research. Embryonic stem cell research has the ability to not only find cures to some of our nation’s most appalling illnesses, but it also involves beneficial utilization of the hundreds of thousands of unused embryos that die each year at fertility centers. For these reasons, it is essential that embryonic stem cell research be funded by the U.S. government.
. The money that congress is thinking of giving the Embryonic Stem Cell Research should go to a better cause such as,
There are several laws that restrict, but don’t completely ban advancements on the use of aborted fetuses for stem cell research. Closely related to stem cell research from embryonic cells is human cloning, which is in most states is not governmentally funded or is illegal. Lives of innocent children that are yet to even have a voice are lost every time a scientist uses an embryo for stem cell research. The embryonic cells are not taken with out consent from the parents. The cells can come from either an aborted child in the early stages of the pregnancy or from embryos that are left over from
Biomedical technology is getting much press due to the stem-cell debate. A controversial topic in itself, with the President of the United States taking a stand on the issue for funding purposes, the topic has received even more press over the consequences resulting from President Bush's decision. With the President's approval rating well over 80 percent since the September 11th attack, those who contest any of his decisions have been receiving feelings of anger from those who support him. I, however, would like to take a stand and contest Bush's decision to limit the stem cell research funding. This paper presents two articles that examine Bush's decision in different ways; one looks at
Embryonic stem cell research is a highly controversial topic in today's society, this kind of stem cell commits to regenerate any type of tissue. Unfortunately, Embryonic Stem Cell Research has a dark side. To obtain these cells will kill the embryo automatically. In other words, the acquirement of the Human Embryonic Stem Cell includes performing an abortion. To obtain these cells, it would kill the embryo. This has created controversy since abortion is such a divisive topic. Politicians are uneasy to take sides. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell issue is today's Pandora's Box due to all the unwittingly chaos that it can bring to our lives. By having this new option available in the medical world,
Many governments have set their stem cells research policy. In United States, the president Bush announced a federal funds and gave an order to allow human embryonic stem cell research to continue which include only 60 cells lines that created before Aug 2001. After this order, hESC or SCNT production is forbidden. These cells lines are not useful for scientists because they are contaminated with pathogens from mouse cells. After that, the U.S. Congress passes the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 to increase federal support for embryonic stem cell research. However, Bush vetoes the bill. In 2009, The U.S. embryonic stem cell policy revised by the president Barack Obama who removed the federal funding limitations on hESC that placed by Bush. This developed new guidelines and protections for such research (furcht, 273-277). In Japan, Singapore, China, South Korea, and Mexico, they don’t have restricted policies for stem cells research. In United Kingdom, hESC or SCNT research is only permitted if the purpose is to increase the knowledge about the development of embryos and the dangerous diseases and how to relieve them. However,, United Kingdome is considered as one of the leaders in hESC research . In Australia, the government bans all SCNT but it allows the using of embryos that remained before April 5, 2002. (Dhar “Stem Cell Research Policies around the
Stem cell related diseases affect over 100 million americans (White). Right now, there are plenty of government funds for stem cell research, and if we continue on the same path as we are now, stem cell research should be successful; however, the ethics used for embryonic stem cell research are incomprehensibly horrific (Stem cell policy). If this continues to be funded, it could have answers to numerous major diseases, including why they are caused, prevention, and cures for the diseases. More scientific research, however, needs to go into more possible solutions, to find a more humane method of treating these diseases that pleases both sides of the stem cell research debate, for the solutions, now, are not very strong. Because stem