Week 4 Case Study Analysis

Week 4 Case Study Analysis
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
Abstract
The paper will discuss positive arguments in support of human embryonic stem(ES) cell research. It explains why I would continue funding a stem cell research institution. Furthermore, it justifies why I support the use of spare embryos because they would go to waste anyway. The article starts by examining the moral debate surrounding ES cell research. It exposes the weaknesses in the argument that using spare embryos is immoral. It also opposes the suggestion that embryos are human beings strongly. After that, it shows why killing a spare embryo is not the same as killing a human being. The paper concludes by stating the importance of ES cell research. It reveals the potential of the study to give insight into biological processes and produce a cure for various diseases. This potential as well as the probabilities of Embryonic Stem cell research, related to the weak moral argument of those who oppose it, is presented as the reason why I would continue contributing to the research fund.
Week 4 Case Study Analysis
Like, the issue of abortion, embryonic stem cell research has become a very divisive debate, pitting “pro-life” apologists on one side and progressive scientists on the other. Without any delay, let me state that I have no issues with the use of spare embryos. This stand might wrongly be viewed as radical and callous. Taking that stand, however, does not mean that I am “anti-life” in any way.

In fact, I am a zealous advocate for the right to life and human dignity.
The debate on embryonic stem cell research revolves around whether embryos should be treated as human beings or not. Human embryonic stems(ES) cells are obtained from pre-implantation embryos. Specifically, they are derived from the inner cells of blastocysts which develop after fertilization of the oocyte (Morrison, 2009). The embryonic stem cell research mostly makes use of IVF embryos.
There exists a difference between human beings and potential human beings. Scientific research has indicated that only an average of 30%-40% of embryos develops into a fetus. Many cells have the theoretical potential of becoming human beings. For example, nuclear transplantation can turn the nucleus of a somatic cell into an embryo. If we were to follow the “pro-life” apologists, any activity that leads to the destruction of a somatic cell would also be viewed as murder. It is a clear indication that the idea that an embryo or a stem cell is a human being is far-fetched (Robertson, 1999).
Additionally, “pro-life” opponents argue that life begins at conception. Evidently, that argument has no scientific ground. Reproduction is a process, not an event, where it starts is debatable. Some people can argue that it begins with ovulation and the release of sperms. If an embryo is a potential human being, what can one say about an ovum that is never fertilized? It is also a potential human being.
ES cell research can give great insight into biological processes such as human development and differentiation. It also provides hope for the discovery of a cure for conditions such as spinal cord injury and diabetes (Morrison, 2009). Embryos used in this research are rarely developed to human beings. Why would we allow the “real” human beings to suffer because of embryo’s which will go to the drains anyway? The sick patients can feel pain but the embryos cannot. By allowing ill people to continue suffering, we have already lost our moral bearing.
In conclusion, ES cell research has the potential to solve adverse medical conditions that human beings suffer from. Moreover, I have no reservations about the destruction of spare embryos. That is why I would continue contributing to the Regional Juvenile Diabetes Fund.
References
Morrison, E. E. (2009). Health care ethics: Critical issues for the 21st century. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Robertson, J. A. (1999). Ethics and policy in embryonic stem cell research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 9(2), 109-136.