Embryonic Stem Cell Research
In 1998, the world was introduced to the start of embryonic stem cell research. It has since been the topic of a heated debate between politicians, religious figures, ethicists, theologians and scientists. It raises the question of whether or not the ends justify the means. Many people seem to have a different answer to this question but the overall response from a Catholic position, from an individual and Catholic Church standpoint is loud and clear: embryonic stem cell research is immoral. The sanctity of life is held in high regard in the Catholic tradition, therefore making embryonic stem cell research morally wrong. To justify this, it is important to consider whether or not an embryo is a human from perspectives that are for and against this research, and their justifications. Whilst there is no united Catholic view, drawing from traditional ethics and Catholic principles can give an estimate of the overall Catholic perspective on the treatment of human embryos as opposed to the foreseen medical benefits on the other end of the spectrum. In a broad sense, the use of human embryos is unjustifiable and wrong in the eyes of the Catholic community, no matter how promising the benefits are as it involves the killing of an embryo, and thus by extension, can be regarded as murder.
“We value the preciousness of life…as far as IVF embryos are concerned, those who have the responsibility make those decisions, have already made an important ethical decision…the embryos will not be given life…do we use them to try and and further research or do we throw them out? The ethical decision is clearly to use them for research. We have a duty to other generations to make sure that science is advanced.” (Finkel, 2005)
It may first be useful to take a look at what is involved in the procedure and the arguments that arise in support of the research. Embryonic stem cell research can be performed in two ways. One involves using spare embryos from IVF clinics and the other involves using aborted embryos from 5-9 weeks of gestation. These cells are undifferentiated cells that can change into other cell types. (Finkel, 2005) This research, if successful, could be the cure to many diseases and could help with the saving and betterment of human life for millions. Whilst it may sound like the benefits are worthy of further research, it is important to consider the flip side of this moral debate. Even though using embryos from IVF clinics that would inevitably be thrown out is on the surface seen as the more ethical choice, as opposed to using aborted foetuses, there are many variables that throw this issue into a medical grey area and raise a world of ethical questions. For, there are two sides to the debate – the benefits of using embryonic stem cells and the moral costs of using these embryos, which many would regard as murder. (Finkel, 2005) This debate comes down to one issue which is whether or not these test tube embryos are humans. Many scientists and stem cell research simply believe think that these cells are ineffective if not used in this sort of research. The New York Times editorials, have even described them multiple times as “a microscopic clump of cells.” (Snow, 2003). The argument for the research is that there is great need for this kind of research and the benefits foreseen are worthy of further exploration. These cells used from IVF clinics are otherwise thrown out and unused. The embryo is in fact dead and has been when embryonic stem cell research begins. Is using these cells proportionate to the ultimate goal of medical benefits for many currently incurable diseases? Alison and Steve Alderton, a couple with a son who had aids, an incurable disease that millions around the globe suffer from, took a supportive attitude to the new research:

Of course, this seems to be the logical option. It has already been decided that these cells are in any other way useless and will be tossed out and therefore it only seems logical to try and further this research in a way that could possibly benefit all. “Science is not a horserace where success comes from backing the winner…uncertainty in research means success comes from backing as many horses as possible.” (Snow, 2003) The horse in this case is embryonic stem cell research. Of course there are alternatives such adult stem cell research but with much promise in the use of embryos, why not try and utilize this to its fullest potential? This is where theological values come in, and where Catholic principles can be of assistance in decision making.
The way in which Christians may regard this research is dependent on many variables. Examples of this are the scriptures and tradition. But no Christian has the one united view. It is moreover the different Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant interpretations of what is may mean to be a Christian in regards to issues such as embryonic stem cell research. An argument made by John W Bowker, a Professor of Religious Studies at Lancaster University, is that issues are raised when ‘envisaged or unprecedented’ disputes occur. When traditions and religions lay down their foundations and values, they are unable to foresee modern technology such as embryonic stem cell research. ‘Each must use its own procedures to move from the established past to the envisioned present’ , to decide whether the research engages with a human life in a way that is either positive, negative or neutral in regards to the foundations and principles of that specific tradition (The Ciba Foundation, 1986). It is through this that decisions need to be made for the ‘rights of the voiceless’, since they have no utterance of their own opinion (The Ciba Foundation, 1986). As humans, these decisions are made every day. Adults make decisions for children that are not old enough to make their own, as some make decisions for their loved ones as they grow older and closer to dying. “While human life is a basic good… it does not follow that life cannot be taken when doing so is the lesser of 2 evils….or the greater of two goods.” (The Ciba Foundation, 1986)This is a utilitarian ethic viewpoint of deciding upon the greater good for the greatest amount. Some religions may accept this as a human life or its equivalent as the lesser of 2 evils. So what can quality as the moral equivalent of a human being? An example given again by Mr Bowker is that a human may go to war to defend their freedom but must kill another in order to do this. This could imply that freedom is the moral equivalent of a human life. So perhaps it could be asked of embryos to fight in a justifiable war against a specific defect. Some religions may be able to accept this principle of sacrifice. (The Ciba Foundation, 1986) In many western religions however, as previously mentioned, the union of a sperm and egg represents the potential for a new being. In terms of promise for new life, the assertion is that an embryo, even at its earliest stages has the full moral regard as a fully grown adult. Pope John Paul II, whilst referring specifically to embryonic stem cell research ruled out “the manipulation and destruction of human embryos,” on the grounds that “methods that fail to respect the dignity and value of a person must always be avoided.” (Snow, 2003). So whilst the lesser of two evils may be to put these embryos at the frontline of our battle against diseases, it should be most important to consider what the foetus would object to, given it was able to.
In terms of Catholicism, the goals must be proportional to the lengths one will go to reach them. This sort of thinking takes on a deontological viewpoint. Immanuel Kant believed that human beings should be treated as an end in themselves and not as a means to something else. This can be interpreted as saying that it is not justifiable to use an embryo – a human being – to reach some sort of goal, no matter how this may benefit other humans. Lisa Sowle Cahill wrote about 5 different values, drawn specifically from Catholic theory and principles. These included the value of nascent life, moral virtue, medical benefits, distributive justice and a socio ethos of generosity and solidarity. The one that may help answer the question of whether we should use these embryonic stem cells is ‘the value of medical benefit’. And there are definitely many of them; these cells have astonishing potential to help those with incurable diseases. The catholic principle that can be used against this is double effect. This essentially comes back to whether or not an embryo can be treated as a human. To take a child or adult’s life and use it to save many others is without a doubt, wrong. Many ethicists and religious groups regard an embryo as a human as it creates the potential for life. The Catholic Church as well as other theists embrace the notion that human life begins from the union of a sperm and ovum (The Ciba Foundation, 1986). An encyclical from Pope John Paul II on the value and inviolability of human life, specifically states that “from the time the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor the mother; it is rather the life of a new human begin with his own growth it would never be made human if it were not human already…right from fertilization the adventure of a human life begins…”(Vatican, 1995). The opinion is rather obvious. The Catholic Church is in no way supportive of this action, as killing an embryo is taking a human life. The double effect here is that whilst the medical benefits are promising, the moral costs foreseen could have a negative impact on humanity. To encourage the use of these embryos as a solution to the many problems facing the medical world is encouraging the destruction of human life and treating it with little importance.
There is an infinite amount of perspectives on the use of embryonic stem cell research, from those that come from all backgrounds - Catholics, religious figures, atheists, scientists and everyday individuals, some suffering from, or know people who suffer from diseases and others who can only view this research from a subjective point of view. We all however, essentially base this decision on whether or not an embryo can truly be regarded as a human being. In terms of Catholicism, the perception is that an embryo holds all the same moral status as any other human being, and therefore should be treated with the same dignity and given the right to live.

Annotated Bibliography
Finkel, E. (2005). Stem Cells: Contraversy at the Frontiers of Science. Sydney: ABC Books for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
The book gave sufficient background information on embryonic stem cell research and mainly discussed the ethical issues associated with the use of embryonic stem cells, however was able to contradict these and give arguments in support of the research. Gave some brief mentions of the Catholic Church perspective, relevant to assignment. Very useful source. The author, Elizabeth Finkel is a science journalist, making her writing somewhat legitimate. She drew from many different sources of information and different perspectives, from an individual, government, worldwide and religious standpoint in order to cover a broad spectrum. This source was useful in my research as it helped give me some background information on embryonic stem cell research and helped lay the foundations of what my ethical approach would be.
Morris, J. (2006). The ethics of biotechnology. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers.
This source discussed the new modern forms of biotechnology. Did not use this very much at all. Got some good source notes but overall, did not use much of the information. Was however, a reliable source of information, but just happened to be irrelevant and I had most of the relevant information from other sources anyway.
Snow, N. E. (2003). Stem Cell Research: New Frontiers in Science and Ethics. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Discussed the ethics of stem cell research as both for and against. There was two large chapters on catholic viewpoints. chapter 8 discussed values in the stem cell debate from catholic contributions. Very useful source, probably the best.
The Ciba Foundation. (1986). Human Embryo Research: Yes or No? New York: Tavistock Publications.
A little bit outdated, however took information from a wide range of experts in the field and different perspectives, and had a great deal of information from the Catholic standpoint. Helped me draw some ethnographic views.
Vatican. (1995, March 25). Evangelium Vitae: An encyclical from Pope John Paul II on the Value & Inviolability of Human Life. Retrieved May 11, 2012, from The Vatican: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html
The source involved extracts from Evangelium Vitae, an encyclical from Pope John Paul II. It mainly discussed the importance of nascent life. Was a very useful and reliable source. It helped me draw conclusions about the main Catholic Church standing on the use of embryonic stem cells.