Use of Human Fetal Tissue in Research is Morally Repugnant Essay

Embryonic stem cell research is important for further development in the medical field. It strongly supports the idea that every life has value, an idea known as human dignity. Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, and thus, are all equal. The idea of radical equality before God leads us to think no less of someone regardless of their physical appearance, religious beliefs, cultural background, or anything else. It is through virtues such as charity, mercy, and justice that our human dignity is preserved. By living through these virtues and realizing how to effectively instill them within us, we are able to live a virtuous life. This paper argues that although issues involving embryonic stem cell research are controversial, research in this area is typically permissible for further development in the medical field when looking to preserve human dignity. In order to defend this thesis, this paper will be structured into three sections as followed: the description of embryonic stem cell research, the development of a moral lens, and the moral argument and analysis of this case.

This section of Chalmers’ book makes the reader ponder the morality of medical experiments like abortions, stem cell research, and infanticide in the world today and questions whether we have learned from Nazi medical experiments in the past.

Lastly, Mary, a co-worker, was interviewed in relation to embryonic harvesting and freezing. Mary’s nursing experience spans 30 years and as she states, science and technology have changed tremendously since the beginning of her career. Although she promotes the process of life, such as in the case of the Capato’s, she does state ethical concern in morality resulting when “embryonic freezing and harvesting is manipulated for the purposes of research,

In my opinion using aborted fetal tissue for embryonic stem cell research is ethical. Even though my Catholic beliefs teach that life starts at conception I still have my own opinion. Human dignity is a term that states that because we are made in the image and likeness of God, we have value and worth. Though the fetus has a heartbeat, it has no human emotions or conscience. If you were to end what may have become a human to help a living human not suffer their entire life, what you have done was good. My opinion and my reasoning are my own, everyone can have an opinion on this matter, which needs further discussion in the scientific community and in the

This report describes how ethics involving embryos has been ongoing for 25 years but has significantly increased with the stem cell controversy. Another issue brought up by this report is whether or not federal funds should be spent on an issue that is so ethically

This proposal is immoral because it violates a central tenet of all civilized codes on human experimentation beginning with the Nuremberg Code: It approves doing deadly harm to a member of the human species solely for the sake of potential benefit to others. The embryos to be destroyed by researchers in this campaign are at the same stage of development as embryos in the womb who have been protected as human subjects in federally funded research since 1975.(4) President Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) and its 1994 predecessor, the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel, conceded that the early human embryo is a form of developing human life that deserves our respect(5). Treating human life as mere research material is no way to show respect.

¨We’ve been very good at getting heart, liver, lung because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part¨-Deborah Nucatola. Saling fetal tissue and fetal parts is wrong to the human race especially when directors sale these parts for studying, we are not test dummies to be tested on we are Human Beings.

Tissue from human fetuses is now being used in medical research, as it can supposedly be used to find potential treatments for a wide range of common diseases. A certain bioethicist at the University of Wisconsin even said that fetal tissue research has benefited “virtually every person in this country.”

But anti-abortion activists have also scored big when it comes to blocking new medical research that may lead to better contraceptives and earlier medical abortions; like RU 486, as well stem cell research for the treatments for numerous diseases. “Fetal tissue research, for instance, has led to advances in the treatment of Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries, diabetes and leukemia. Despite the fact that organs from the corpses of murder victims can be donated, antiabortion activists believe tissue donation from aborted fetuses encourages abortion and should therefore be prohibited,” (Hontz,1998) .

This brings about many ethical questions and moral concerns. The practice that likely incites the most controversy in selective abortion is sex selective reduction. As technology has advanced, the availability of ultrasound technology has provided practitioners with the ability to identify many fetal characteristics, one of which is gender (Higgins, 2016). Sex-selective reduction mirrors the practice of so called “gendercide” that occurs in countries such as China and India. In these countries sex selective abortion is used to create a population that is predominantly male. To American’s these methods may seem inhumane, and there are many organizations in the US and around the world attempting to stop gender specific abortion. What many Americans probably do not realize is these practices occur in the United States as well, and they have for a long time. While these methods are considered legal in the United States, the ethical implications of aborting fetuses based on sex creates an entirely new concern. The practice of selective abortion in general has created a number of ethical questions for society, and those practicing in the medical

That separates the decision to terminate a pregnancy from any research that it might later contribute to. So there’s no “maximiz[ing] the value of body parts,” as New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie claimed, to “sell on the open market for profit.” (On Abortion: A Lincoln Position). A number of Republican candidates in the debates, from businessman Donald Trump to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, suggested that what’s wrong with fetal tissue research is that it expresses disrespect for human life. “I believe that we should have a culture of life,” as Florida Gov. Jeb Bush put it, reminding voters that “we ended partial birth abortion” and “were the first state to do a ‘choose life’ license plate.” The Supreme Court has indeed held that government can regulate in ways designed to promote respect for the unborn, even if doing so saves none. It’s easy to understand how it expresses respect for human life, for example, to restrict the use of fetal tissue for trivial purposes like producing cosmetics, or even insufficiently worthy reasons like teaching high school biology. (Stem Cell Research: Medical Miracle or Moral

The themes surrounding abortion tend to generally scathe on a surface level and truly uncover all the underlying themes of the popular topic, the articles “Stem Cells, Sex and Procreation” by John Harris, “A Defense of Abortion” by Judith Thomson, and “Are Pregnant Women Fetal Containers?” by Laura Purdy all discuss the theme of the woman’s and fetuses health and the consequences that can come with both keeping and rejecting the a fetus.

Of all the legal, ethical, and moral issues we Americans continuously fight for or against, abortion may very well be the issue that Americans are most passionate about. The abortion issue is in the forefront of political races. Most recently the “no taxpayer funding for abortion act”, has abortion advocates reeling. Even though abortion has been legal in every state in the United States since the monumental Supreme Court decision, “Roe v Wade”, on January 22, 1973; there are fewer physicians willing to perform abortions today than in 2008. (Kraft) At the heart of the ethical dilemma for many in the medical profession is the viability of the fetus. And just to make this whole dilemma more confusing, according to the United States

It seems that there is always new groundbreaking technology introduced into society. Our hope is to find some magical chemical that will cure all diseases or cancer. Imagine that a miracle substance was found but came, at what some may think is to high a price. Amniotic tissue is remarkable in its healing abilities, however, many think it is wrong to utilize the tissue since it is taken from aborted fetuses and embryos. Are the research processes of fetal tissue in direct conflict with our moral values, or is it negligent for us not to do research that might lead to cures for Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and Parkinson’s disease.

Most people are against Embryonic Stem Cell research mainly because they consider it unethical to use aborted fetuses for research. The two main issues concerning the research are the ethics (Cons) and the benefits (Pros). In any scientific case, ethics must always be considered. But the use of fetuses is something that is of the utmost importance. The costs are generally measured based off of people’s feelings, morals, and knowledge about the subject up for debate. The use of aborted fetuses for stem cell research may have many positive outcomes that can come of it, but many negative outcomes as well; If using aborted fetuses for research can, in the near future, save lives, then it is a research that should be supported, even though some