BIOMEDICAL ETHICS REVIEWS Edited byJames M. Humber and Robert F. Almeder Board of Editors William Bechtel James Muyskens University of California, San Diego University System of Georgia San Diego, CA Atlanta, GA Kurt Hirschhorn James Rachels The Mount Sinai Medical Center University of Alabama, Birmingham New York, NY Birmingham, AL Richard T. Hull George Rainbolt State Univ. of New York, Buffalo Georgia State University Amherst, New York Atlanta, GA Thomas H. Murray Richard Wasserstrom President, The Hastings Center, University of California Garrison, NY Santa Cruz, CA BIOMEDICAL ETHICS REVIEWS Edited byJames M. Humber and Robert F. Almeder Stem Cell Research • 2004 Care of the Aged • 2003 Mental Illness and Public Health Care • 2002 Privacy and Health Care • 2001 Is There a Duty to Die? • 2000 Human Cloning • 1999 Alternative Medicine and Ethics • 1998 What Is Disease? • 1997 Reproduction, Technology, and Rights • 1996 Allocating Health Care Resources • 1995 Physician-Assisted Death • 1994 Bioethics and the Military • 1992 Bioethics and the Fetus • 1991 Biomedical Ethics Reviews • 1990 Should the U.S. Adopt a National Health Insurance Plan? · Are the NIH Guidelines Adequate for the Care and Protection of Laboratory Animals? Biomedical Ethics Reviews • 1989 Should Abnormal Fetuses Be Brought to Term for the Sole Purpose of Providing Infant Transplant Organs? · Should Human Death Be Taken to Occur When Persons Permanently Lose Consciousness? Aids and Ethics • 1988 Biomedical Ethics Reviews • 1987 Prescribing Drugs for the Aged and Dying · Animals as a Source of Human Trans- plant Organs · The Nurse’s Role: Rights and Responsibilities Quantitative Risk Assessment: The Practitioner’s Viewpoint • 1986 Biomedical Ethics Reviews • 1985 Buying and Selling of Human Organs · Sex Preselection · Medical Decisionmaking Under Uncertainty · Concepts of Health and Disease Biomedical Ethics Reviews • 1984 Public Policy and Research with Human Subjects · The Right to Health Care in a Democratic Society · Genetic Screening · Occupational Health The Ethics of Fetal Research and Therapy Biomedical Ethics Reviews • 1983 Euthanasia · Surrogate Gestation · The Distribution of Health Care The Involuntary Commitment and Treatment of Mentally Ill Persons Patenting New Life Forms BIOMEDICAL E T H I C S R E V I E W S S C R TEM ELL ESEARCH Edited by James M. Humber and Robert F. Almeder Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia Springer Science+Business Media, LLC © 2004 by Springer Science+Business Media New York Originally published by Humana Press Inc. in 2004 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2004 All rights in any form whatsoever reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or other- wise) without written permission from the publisher. All papers, comments, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher. This publication is printed on acid-free paper. ∞ ANSI Z39.48-1984 (American National Standards Institute) Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials. Production Editor: Wendy S. Kopf Cover design by Patricia F. Cleary. Photocopy Authorization Policy: Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, provided that the base fee of US $25.00 per copy, is paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center at 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. For those organizations that have been granted a photocopy license from the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged and is acceptable to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. The fee code for users of the Transactional Reporting Service is: [1-58829-401-3/04$25.00]. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 The Library of Congress has cataloged this serial title as follows: Stem cell research / edited by James M. Humber and Robert F. Almeder. p. ; cm. -- (Biomedical ethics reviews ; 2004) Includes index. ISBN 978-1-61737-543-9 ISBN 978-1-59259-674-4 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-59259-674-4 1. Stem cells--Research--Moral and ethical aspects. [DNLM: 1. Embryo Research--ethics. 2. Stem Cells. QS 620 S824 2004] I. Humber, James M. II. Almeder, Robert F. III. Series. QH587.S7226 2004 174’.28--dc21 2003009570 Preface Today, few doubt that human embryonic stem cell research possesses the potential for significantly reducing the suffering of those inflicted with such severely debilitating diseases as Parkinson’s disease. It is this potential that has led many to argue that stem cell research should proceed with all deliberate speed and with as few encumbrances as possible. Others demur. These individuals acknowledge that human embryonic stem cell research might lead to beneficial results, but nevertheless insist that research of this sort is of such a nature that it must be considered morally suspect. More specifically, they argue that the morally trouble- some character of human embryonic stem cell research provides sufficient grounds for believing that this type of experimentation should be proscribed or, at the very least, severely restricted and regulated. At present, the debate between the pro- and anti-stem cell research factions continues to be waged without showing any signs of imminent resolution. The purpose of Stem Cell Research is to introduce readers to the principal arguments used by both sides in the dispute. When examining the arguments that have been advanced for and against the moral propriety of stem cell research, certain issues have come to be viewed as preeminent. All of the chapters in this text focus on issues of this sort. Among these issues are the fol- lowing: What reason (or reasons) are there for believing that the materials used in human embryonic stem cell research should (or should not) be included as full members of the moral community and thus be accorded all of the protections ordinarily extended to such individuals? Does the present debate over stem cell research overemphasize the importance of determining the moral status of the human embryo? Would it be morally wrong to create embryos with the human genome, specifically to secure embryonic stem cells for use in research, knowing that these embryos will be v vi Preface destroyed in the process? Would it be wrong to experiment with stem cells taken from human embryos that were not originally created to produce materials for stem cell research, knowing that the experimentation will lead to the destruction of the embryos? Would it be wrong to experiment with cells taken from human embryos that were not created to produce materials for stem cell research when we know those embryos are about to be destroyed and discarded? Does the current use of human embryonic stem cells in research devalue humanity by treating these materials as mere “commodities?” Finally, are the current regulations on stem cell research unjust because they alienate women from their reproductive labor? Stem Cell Research is the 21st annual volume of Biomedical Ethics Reviews, a series of texts designed to review and update the literature on issues of central importance in bioethics today. It is also the last volume in the series that the current editors will prepare for publication. James Humber is retiring, and Robert Almeder is engaged in so many academic pursuits that he feels he lacks the time to continue as sole editor for the series and do full justice to the job. Still, readers should know that Humana Press is committed to the continued publication of volumes in the Bio- medical Ethics Reviewsseries and is currently engaged in the pro- cess of selecting a new editor for the series. We, the editors, have enjoyed working with all of the employ- ees of Humana Press with whom we have had contact over the years. We would especially like to thank Thomas L. Lanigan, president of Humana Press, for his unwavering support, trustwor- thiness, and invaluable advice. The idea for Biomedical Ethics Reviewswas his, and we deeply appreciate the fact that he selected us to serve as the original editors for the series. We hope his expectations for Biomedical Ethics Reviews have been fulfilled, and are confident that whomever he selects to edit future volumes of Biomedical Ethics Reviews will make us proud to have our names forever associated with the series. In closing, one final comment seems in order. Never, in any of the pages of Biomedical Ethics Reviewsthat we have edited in Preface vii the preceding 21 years, have we taken note of any of the contri- butions and sacrifices our wives have made to provide us with the time necessary to do our work. We know they expect no thanks for their efforts, and suspect that they know us well enough to realize how much we appreciate their support despite the fact that we have been silent for 21 years. Clearly, some formal statement of thanks is called for, and in recompense for our past errors of omission we would like to dedicate this volume of Biomedical Ethics Reviews to our wives, Helene Humber and Virginia Almeder. James M. Humber Robert F. Almeder Contents v Preface xi Contributors 3 An Analogical Argument for Stem Cell Research Richard Werner 25 Marginal Cases and the Moral Status of Embryos Michael J. Almeida 43 Fixations on the Moral Status of the Embryo Michael C. Brannigan 61 Nazi Experiments and Stem Cell Research Dennis R. Cooley 87 Recent Ethical Controversies About Stem Cell Research James J. McCartney 123 Complicity in Embryonic and Fetal Stem Cell Research and Applications: Exploring and Extending Catholic Responses Jan C. Heller 151 Women, Commodification, and Embryonic Stem Cell Research Susan Dodds 175 Index ix Contributors Michael J. Almeida • Division of English, Classics, and Philosophy, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas Michael C. Brannigan • Institute for Cross-Cultural Ethics, LaRoche College, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Dennis R. Cooley • History Department, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota Susan Dodds • Philosophy Program, Faculty of Arts, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia Jan C. Heller • Office of Ethics and Theology, Providence Health System, Seattle, Washington James J. McCartney • Department of Philosophy, Villanova University, Villanova, Pennsylvania Richard Werner • Department of Philosophy, Hamilton College, Clinton, New York xi An Analogical Argument for Stem Cell Research 1 Abstract If a human being no longer has a developed capacity for brain activity, we consider it a dead member of the species Homo sapiens. Although a human corpse is still due some moral consider- ation, it is not due the full moral consideration we give to a fully fledged person, including a fully fledged right to life. The brain- dead human may have a functioning heart, lungs, and cells. It may be able to sustain itself without machines. Yet, if we have proper permission, once it is pronounced dead we may use its organs for transplant or for scientific research that may, in time, help to ameliorate the human condition. A nonsentient human embryo has no mental life, for it lacks a brain. It may have a functioning heart, lungs, and cells and may be able to function within the mother’s uterus. The nonsentient embryo has the same ontological status as the brain-dead human. Accordingly, it has the same moral status, ceteris paribus. If the nonsentient human embryo has the same moral status as the dead human being, it is due some moral consideration, but it is not due a fully fledged right to life. Just as we use the organs of a dead human being for transplant or research, given proper permission, so we can use the cells of the nonsentient human embryo for transplant or research, given proper permission, including for stem cell research. They are morally similar cases that should be judged in morally similar ways. The analogical argument is defended from criticisms based on the potentiality of the unborn, denial that the brain dead human is dead, and the claim that it is wrong to create life to save it.